User talk:Quadell/Archive 48

images
Hi Quadell- I need your help again. a user tagged 60 of my images. They are entered the same as the other 540 I downloaded since feb 09. Could you please contact this user to stop flagging my PD images. The sources are clearly listed in the files. HELP Could you transfer them to Commons like the last time? Thanks, Bob see my discussion page for the deletion flagsVegavairbob (talk) 00:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

GR-7 listed at Redirects for discussion
An editor has asked for a discussion to address the redirect GR-7. Since you had some involvement with the GR-7 redirect, you might want to participate in the redirect discussion (if you have not already done so). Dead3y3 (talk) 13:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

A belated welcome back
A very belated welcome back - just seen your talkpage| --Storye book (talk) 17:47, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

New genera and species based on IUCN database
Hi! I've seen that Polbot is creating new articles basing on IUCN database. As regards genera, the data is insufficient, but considering species, the created stubs are pretty good. Could you please help me to create such a bot for the Polish Wikipedia (or just indicate me the raw data source you used, so that we could build a bot on our own), so that we could also automatically create such articles on species/genera as here? I am a member of Botanics Project and we dramatically suffer on lack of people. This solution could help us a lot, as all we do now is made manually. Best regards, Enzo^ (talk) 14:40, 21 October 2010 (UTC)


 * Hey, sorry for the delay. I'm only around occasionally. Are you still there? – Quadell (talk) 16:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Mercia eagle
Someone has replaced File:Mercia eagle.png with an incorrect one on a blue shield, which never existed. But the file seems to be locked and I can't change it back. ðarkun coll 08:34, 30 October 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion nomination of National Products


A tag has been placed on National Products requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done because the article, which appears to be about a real person, individual animal(s), an organization (band, club, company, etc.), or web content, does not indicate how or why the subject of the article is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not indicate the subject's importance or significance may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that you can assert the notability of the subject, you may contest the deletion by adding  at the top of the article, immediately below the speedy deletion  tag (if no such tag exists, the page is no longer a speedy delete candidate), and providing your reasons for contesting on the article's talk page, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. You may freely add information to the article that would confirm the subject's notability under Wikipedia guidelines.

You may want to read the guidelines for specific types of articles: biographies, websites, bands, or companies. Elton Bunny (talk) 16:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Question about polbot
I have a question about your bot if you dont mind. I noticed that it mostly builds polical related articles but I was wondering if it could be used to build others as well. I have been working to try and build up WikiPoject US and its child projects and there are currently a lot of articles related to US topics that are in need of creation. Two examples are articles related to the National Register of Historic places where there are about 50K still missing and at least 2500 for military biographies (including generals and Medal of Honor recipients). I was wondering if its possible or if you would be interested in assisting in the creation of some of these other missing articles using your bot? Any help, even if just stubs that could be expanded would be greatly appreciated. --Kumioko (talk) 19:08, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Greetings. I'm afraid I no longer have access to the code that I used to create these article years ago. Good luck! – Quadell (talk) 20:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Suggestions for name disambiguation
Hello, Quadell. I know you're not here regularly anymore, but if you used your bot to create another batch of these, I'd be happy to work on them. Hope you're well, Boleyn (talk) 12:59, 19 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Though it warms my heart to hear from you, I'm afraid I no longer have access to the code I once used for this purpose. Happy wiki-ing! – Quadell (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

No bother, thanks for all the work you did on this. Best wishes, Boleyn (talk) 12:39, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Essabar.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Essabar.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'file' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. SchuminWeb (Talk) 17:33, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice. Fixed. – Quadell (talk) 20:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:MedAcetaminophen.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:MedAcetaminophen.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:41, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Slit wrist.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Slit wrist.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:15, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

File permission problem with File:Red setter jumping.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Red setter jumping.jpg. I noticed that while you provided a valid copyright licensing tag, there is no proof that the creator of the file agreed to license it under the given license.

If you created this media entirely yourself but have previously published it elsewhere (especially online), please either
 * make a note permitting reuse under the CC-BY-SA or another acceptable free license (see this list) at the site of the original publication; or
 * Send an email from an address associated with the original publication to , stating your ownership of the material and your intention to publish it under a free license. You can find a sample permission letter here. If you take this step, add OTRS pending to the file description page to prevent premature deletion.

If you did not create it entirely yourself, please ask the person who created the file to take one of the two steps listed above, or if the owner of the file has already given their permission to you via email, please forward that email to .

If you believe the media meets the criteria at Non-free content, use a tag such as or one of the other tags listed at File copyright tags, and add a rationale justifying the file's use on the article or articles where it is included. See File copyright tags for the full list of copyright tags that you can use.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have provided evidence that their copyright owners have agreed to license their works under the tags you supplied, too. You can find a list of files you have created in [ your upload log]. Files lacking evidence of permission may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 04:16, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:PD-Germany
Template:PD-Germany has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 01:15, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Move to Commons
Hi Quadell, how can i move one of my files, ? from en.wikipedia to Wikimedia Commons? — Moebiusuibeom-en (talk) 03:39, 7 January 2011 (UTC)

Undeletion request
Hello, Could you please undelete this file? You deleted it because a user had copied it to Commons. But actually, as a non-free image, it should not have been copied to Commons. It should get deleted there eventually. That is why it is necessary that this file be on Wikipedia, with of course the appropriate tags relative to the use of non-free images, in this case, and. The description page would, with minor adjustments, look like, for example, the description page of this other image. Thanks. -- Asclepias (talk) 20:03, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Latvian 5, 2 and 1 cent coin design.JPG
You deleted this image as a duplicate of an image on Commons, but didn't update any of the current uses, causing three uses to break. Can you fix this, please? --MZMcBride (talk) 02:48, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Stairmaster.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:Stairmaster.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, please add a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a brief restatement of that website's terms of use of its content. However, if the copyright holder is a party unaffiliated from the website's publisher, that copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider verifying that you have specified sources for those files as well. You can find a list of files you have created [ in your upload log]. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged per Wikipedia's criteria for speedy deletion, F4. If the image is copyrighted and non-free, the image will be deleted 48 hours after 13:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC) per speedy deletion criterion F7. If the file is already gone, you can still make a request for undeletion and ask for a chance to fix the problem. If you have any questions or are in need of assistance please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Musamies (talk) 13:41, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hail to thee, O Almighty Looshpah!
We dropped the edit count requirements at the WP:SERVICE awards - the upper levels were impossibly difficult. You are eligible for an advance in grade (this will not affect your paycheck, alas).

But I'm confused - There is a userbox on your user page that says that you have been here for 6 years, 11 months, and 9 days. But according to you have been here eight years and a bit.

Assuming that the latter is true, you are now actually a Master Editor II and an Almighty (rather than merely Illustrious) Looshpah. I didn't make the changes because of the confusion over when you began, but you can and should.

Congratulations! Herostratus (talk) 17:39, 14 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the notice! I am retroactively proud. – Quadell (talk) 13:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Chevrolet Vega images
Hello Quadell- User: Biker Biker is flagging my pre 1978 public domain images as Possibly unfree files Please help. see below.(Barnstarbob (talk) 11:17, 27 April 2011 (UTC))

I contend that the claim is invalid. Images up to 1977 are only in the public domain if the publisher failed to assert copyright. These are selective scans from brochures and I do not believe that the brochures were published without copyright claims. What I would like to see is specific evidence e.g. the front/rear covers of the brochures showing that there is no assertion of copyright. In the absence of this I think we have to assume that copyright applies. --Biker Biker (talk) 11:32, 27 April 2011 (UTC)


 * And my assertion is that the pre-1978 only applies when no copyright claim is made. That is almost certainly not the case with these images. --Biker Biker (talk) 11:22, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
 * To expand what I'm saying - I contend that the claim is invalid. Images up to 1977 are only in the public domain if the publisher failed to assert copyright. These are selective scans from brochures and I do not believe that the brochures were published without copyright claims. What I would like to see is specific evidence e.g. the front/rear covers of the brochures showing that there is no assertion of copyright. In the absence of this I think we have to assume that copyright applies. --Biker Biker (talk) 11:33, 27 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:City of Waterloo
Template:City of Waterloo has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:48, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

File:Eeoc.jpg listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Eeoc.jpg, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 21:08, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

File:GO Empty.PNG needs authorship information.
Dear uploader:

The media file you uploaded as File:GO Empty.PNG appears to be missing information as to its authorship (and or source), or if you did provide such information, it is confusing for others trying to make use of the image.

It would be appreciated if you would consider updating the file description page, to make the authorship of the media clearer.

Although some images may not need author information in obvious cases, (such where an applicable source is provided),authorship information aids users of the image, and helps ensure that appropriate credit is given (a requirement of some licenses).


 * If you created this media yourself, please consider explicitly including your user name, for which: will produce an appropriate expansion, or use the own template.


 * If this is an old image, for which the authorship is unknown or impossible to determine, please indicate this on the file description page.

If you have any questions please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 09:05, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Thanks, nice to see you back  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  17:56, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Ditto, thanks! I must admit, I am both surprised and happy to see you back. I hope you make this stay a long one, two years is a long time to be Quadell-less :) Anyway, you'll be glad to know after your nice nomination that I am still an active admin! - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 18:08, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * [[Image:Face-surprise.svg|25px]] Oh my gosh, you're that Jarry!? I'm embarrassed to admit, I'd temporarily forgotten! Oh wow, I'm delighted that you're here, and that you're still doing such great work. That's fantastic. – Quadell (talk) 18:14, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! (You're probably surprised that so many watchlisted your talk page.) Maybe the latest WikiLove feature wasn't just retaining existing editors afterall. It could even drag back editors that left for quite a while. OhanaUnitedTalk page 20:13, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * 4 times more TPSers than me *secretly jealous* *grins* Don't worry Quadell, I had to run a quick search of my own talk page archives to make sure I wasn't going to embarrass myself by posting. - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 21:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Nice to see you back! (Although I wasn't watching your talk; just saw your comment at PUF). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 21:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Ditto! You have been missed, and I hope you stick with us for a while. :D --Moonriddengirl (talk) 22:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Welcome back! Will we be seeing another instalment of Suggestions for disambiguation repair? (I enjoyed working on it, though fear for progress on umpteen other things I ought to be getting done off-Wiki if it does get revived!) PamD (talk) 22:11, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

You are all wonderful! Yes, I plan to be around and about, at least several times a week. Since I don't really have a useful watchlist at this point, please feel free to bring me any concerns or requests you have here. And speaking of which, PamD, that's a good question! I don't have access to my old Perl (programming) environment, and I'm not sure how the Wikipedia API has changed, but I may be able to scrape together something... if I get the time. We'll see. Thanks again, y'all! – Quadell (talk) 11:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Copyright page
Hi -- I've been a frequent user of User:Quadell/copyright to check for copyrights, but Jappalang recently pointed me at http://onlinebooks.library.upenn.edu/cce/ which has some renewals in that aren't in the links you give. I have added it to my own list but I thought you might like to update your page too. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:25, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! I've updated my page. – Quadell (talk) 12:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Toyohara Chikanobu
Thank you for your peer review comments. A quick scan of this article's edit history here reveals that I am not the principle contributor. User:GaryD144's investments of time and care are noteworthy, but his contributions remain those of an intermittent, single-purpose account. I don't want to discourage his continued edits and participation, but at the same time, I simply haven't figured out how to engage more interactive give-and-take. Hopefully, your words and your perspective were precisely what was needed at this time. --Tenmei (talk) 17:59, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you, I hope so too. – Quadell (talk) 18:46, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It's rare to see a peer review going concurrently with a GAN. Since peer review could take anywhere from a week to months(!), I would suggest you to "speedy fail" this article based on its current condition and state that there's no prejudice for future nominations as long as the peer review is completed. OhanaUnitedTalk page 19:32, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Now that you're back...
Can I drag you to help Wikispecies that desperately needs someone to do what Polbot's function #6? There's no one better to ask for than the person who wrote the script for Polbot. OhanaUnitedTalk page 02:27, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm afraid I haven't run Polbot in over two years, and I don't have a perl system in which to run it. In addition, the API has changed considerably since then, so it would take quite a bit of effort to get her back up and running. I'm not ruling it out... but I don't think it's going to happen in the near future. Sorry! – Quadell (talk) 03:14, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Understood, thanks for your reply. OhanaUnited<b style="color:green;">Talk page</b> 23:49, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Great to see you're back! Tony   (talk)  17:21, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
Quadell, thanks for the nice barnstar and the equally nice vandalism on my userpage. Both brought a smile to my face, something that's sorely needed because I tend to take stuff that goes on here way too seriously. I appreciate it, and from looking at your talk page, it looks like others do, too. Thanks for coming back. Christine (talk) 19:05, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


 * It's easy to take wikidrama way to seriously. I'm glad you can find joy in what you do here.
 * I see from your talk page that you have two children with disabilities, and are fluent in sign language. (I just finished a class on ASL a couple months ago.) Do you have any experience with AAC aids? I am in the process of reviewing the Augmentative and alternative communication article for GA status. Once it passes I'm considering nominating it for FA. Would you be interested in being a part of that? I could use a second person to help with the grueling FA process. (The last time I got an article promoted was back in 2004, and the standards have changed a bit since then.)
 * All the best, – Quadell (talk) 19:55, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey Q, to tell you the truth, AACs aren't my field of expertise in disability. All those years I spent as a sign language interpreter focused on communication access.  I took some courses in both college and grad school, but it was very basic information.  However, not knowing about something has never stopped me before on Wikipedia!  Once the article passes to GA, I'll take a look at it, do some copyediting for you and check the sources.  I'll put the article on my watchlist in the meantime, and let me know any way else I can assist.  Yes, the FAC is very different than it was in 2004; heck, it's changed since my first FAC in 2008!  Plus, it's gotten a bit more contentious, and you never know what will happen. Christine (talk) 19:40, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

More thanks
Thanks for picking up the Manila hostage crisis review! Deryck C. 15:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
 * My pleasure. You seem to be tackling the improvement suggestions like a boss! – Quadell (talk) 13:52, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * Thank you! Interesting aside: I had my first (and last) Rockstar energy drink today. So "tireless" is fitting. For now... [[Image:Robot_icon.svg|30px]] – Quadell (talk) 19:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

South Africa
Hi, would you weight again on Media_copyright_questions? Am I right that being PD in South Africa is not enough to be free for Wikipedia? --<span class="I_STALK_DAMIENS">damiens.rf 22:56, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh man, this sucks. Okay, I commented there. – Quadell (talk) 01:40, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
I was very surprised - and very pleased - to come back from my wikibreak and see your efforts to congratulate and encourage all the nominators of promoted FACs. Thank you so much for taking the time to do that. I wish we delegates had the bandwidth to have started that a long time ago, so its nice to see you step in and fill that gap. Keep up the good work!!! We definitely appreciate it. Karanacs (talk) 01:39, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're very welcome! I just look through Featured article candidates/Featured log/July 2011 and Good articles/Log frequently, and then use a customized Wikilove script I whipped up. It's especially fun (and sometimes challenging) to find just the right image. Glad I can help! – Quadell (talk) 21:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Hi, Thanks for the congrats re Battle of Mughar Ridge and the invite to review others' GA applications. Not sure I'm up to that though - how would I choose an article? Also right now I have a number of articles which I want to bring up to GA if possible but will keep in mind your invite to review. Thanks again --Rskp (talk) 02:06, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruislip-Northwood Urban District
Thank you very much for your message. I'll be resuming my reviewing soon. Harrison49 (talk) 21:08, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Glad to hear it! – Quadell (talk) 21:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

:)
Just wanted to say thank you properly for getting involved with the AAC article - I have an excellent adopter (ht:Danger) but I'm learning a lot from watching you, and the other experienced editors who turn up in your wake, work. (Also apologies in advance for when it's clear I've got no idea what I'm doing ) Failedwizard (talk) 21:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * No problem! And having no idea what we're doing -- and then doing it anyway -- is how we all learn on Wikipedia. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 21:54, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
 * :) Oh, while I think on, one of the things that changed when copyediting AAC article for the GA criteria was that the 'see also' and 'futher information' links got taken out - would you talk me thought some of the reasoning there? I'm trying to get a sense of when and when not to use them (was just about to put another in when I realised they were gone :) Failedwizard (talk) 09:26, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Sure. The "See also" section should generally not contain links which are included as wikilinks in the text itself. (This also applies to hatnotes.) So it shouldn't say "See also: sign language" if sign language is linked in the text. The Manual of Style's See Also section has more on this.
 * Another thing to watch for is "product placement" advertising. That's when Joe Blow is trying to sell his "Joe Blow Patented AAC Aid", so see makes a page and adds a "See also" link to it in the AAC page. If Joe Blow's aid is no more notable than hundreds of competing products, if it isn't worth mentioning in the article text, then it shouldn't be linked in a see also section. (That goes for "External Links" too.) It's especially tricky with AAC, since some commercial system (like PECS or Blissymbols) really are worth mentioning in the article, while others (like Facilitated Communication) really are not. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 12:53, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you! It was the internal link thing that I'd missed - I think most of the links were added in an effort to try summary style - certainly there are a few problems with linked articles for a couple of aac manufacturers that (perhaps reasonably) are very positive towards the manufacturers. :) Failedwizard (talk) 13:34, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks!
I didn't respond to the first message you sent because I thought it was automated. Ha! Anyway, thanks for both messages; I appreciate them. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:56, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Keep up the good work! – Quadell (talk) 21:25, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Manila hostage crisis/GA2
Thanks for the reminder. Yes I know it's been on hold for a while, although with two instances of large-scale content merging and forking to do, and a newly discovered source discrepancy (in the "assault" section) it is likely to take longer than the standard GA time-scale (7 days since first put on hold - this one will probably take 2 to 3 weeks) to complete the improvements. If you want to wait that's fine, but if you want to fail this article at this stage and have someone re-nominate it after the improvements are made, that's fine too. Deryck C. 16:39, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, 3 weeks is too long. Okay, I'll tell you what. I'll fail it now, but if you get it correctly sourced and forked, let me know when you renominate it. If I'm the reviewer for GA3, I'll just take up where I left off. Does that sound good? – Quadell (talk) 16:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Wadsworth Jarrell
I think you owe Sarah a Senoufo mask - :) Kaldari (talk) 18:38, 17 July 2011 (UTC)  – Quadell (talk) 12:13, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

GA review
Thanks. I would like to review an article but I don't knoiw how to get started with the headings. LittleJerry (talk) 20:20, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

So i just type in my review and save? LittleJerry (talk) 23:18, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Yes... although I tend to review in little bits at a time. – Quadell (talk) 23:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Can I reconsider? I miised the fact that the first four or five sources are cited differently. LittleJerry (talk) 02:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)


 * Can you please fix it so the first few sources are cited the same way as the others? I missed that part and it's the only thing that's a problem. LittleJerry (talk) 02:46, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * – Quadell (talk) 16:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

GA award
Thanks, much appreciated. I've tried in the past to begin a few GA reviews, but can't seem to get the hang of them. I'll try again, I suppose. Cheers, Constantine  ?  13:15, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Willie Nelson
Thanks for the message, it took a while but I got it promoted. I was thinking in start reviewing articles but I'm not so very sure because I usually have some copy-edit issues, but I might try sometime.-- <font color="#E62020" size="2.5px">GD <font color="#273BE2" size="2.5px">uwen  <font color="cyan" size="0.5px">Tell me!  21:08, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

You love love

 * Oh, a gentleman has to keep his secrets, you know...
 * But this does give me a great idea for a userbox! [[Image:Face-smile-big.svg|28px]] – Quadell (talk) 21:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm at #3 now, and I guess I take pride in it. Nice userbox! Now give me some love, you cheapskate! What are you, Dutch? Drmies (talk) 05:33, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Oh My! :D
Hehe, Quadell you are making me blush! :) Thanks so much for the awards and recognition! It means a lot! I really appreciate them, you are very kind and thoughtful. Thanks again :D-- CallMe Nathan  &bull;  Talk2Me   16:00, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I'm always glad to bring a little happiness into the life of a fellow Wikipedian! – Quadell (talk) 21:24, 19 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Haha never! Your kind recognition will never wear off :) Ah, that is the goal! Hopefully soon one day all Carey-articles will be promoted! That is the goal :)-- CallMe Nathan  &bull;  Talk2Me   18:02, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Re:Getting fed up
Most of the drama is off-wiki, actually and in the case of yesterdays debate about notability. Thanks for the offer, but the only thing you can do is watchlist this article.YE <font color="#66666">Pacific  <font color="#66666">Hurricane  14:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Okay. Hope things look brighter tomorrow. – Quadell (talk) 17:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Hey there, never realized you were back (I'm barely around myself these days). Good to see you around. MLauba (Talk) 16:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC) MLauba (Talk) 16:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Good to see you too! Glad to see some familiar faces signatures. Hope you're well! – Quadell (talk) 17:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

A bit more advice, if you have a moment
So now that I have the image up, what is the proper method to crop it for inclusion in a wiki entry? I realized that If I just crop it in Photoshop and reupload, I'd have to jump through all the copyright hoops again... or would I? Thanks for your help. - CompliantDrone (talk) 18:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello again. The Wikipedia software doesn't have a built-in way to crop an image, I'm afraid, so you'll have to crop it in Photoshop or whatever. It shouldn't be too much of a hassle, though. Simply upload the cropped version to a new name, for instance File:Jesco White 2011 cropped.jpg, and tag the new photo as . (That tag says you don't claim any additional copyright on the cropping or color-fixing or whatever you do to it.) And be sure to link the original picture as the source. Does that make sense? I'll keep an eye on things too, to make sure it all works fine. – Quadell (talk) 18:44, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you again. - CompliantDrone (talk) 19:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
for the bar-themed WikiLove... Two WikiLoves and a newsletter on the same day? Oh boy, it's going to be a good one! :D Seriously though, silly as it sounds, it does make me feel like my work is appreciated, and that I am welcomed here at Wikipedia. I appreciate that. And I am generally a supporter of "passing it along" -- so, I'll keep spreading that WikiLove. You bet your biscuits, I will... Thanks again! Bobnorwal (talk) 15:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Great to hear it! – Quadell (talk) 18:42, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

File:GO Empty.PNG listed for deletion
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:GO Empty.PNG, has been listed at Files for deletion. Please see the to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sreejith K (talk) 18:39, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know. – Quadell (talk) 18:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion re
Thanks for the barnstars, you're too kind! :) Queenieacoustic (talk) 18:29, 22 July 2011 (UTC)