User talk:SandyGeorgia/arch63

I'm so sorry...
(hugs). Ealdgyth - Talk 01:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

We lost Ginger after 16 good years. Doubtless she and your guy are busy stealing food off that great kitchen counter in the sky. Dr. Dr. (Mr. M.D.) Arthur Resnick (talk) 01:27, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

No doubt your companion lived an awesome life, Sandy! He's up there in the sky, enjoying all that space. It's a miserable experience, I know, but you know? He's in a better place.  ceran  thor 01:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Better indeed.  Fvasconcellos (t·c) 01:41, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear. It's been a rough year for four-legged companions. Seems like everyone I know lost one. :( Kafka Liz (talk) 03:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I suffered a loss of close friend a month ago, and can only imagine how hard this must be for you. At least you will always have the happy memories. Best regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 05:25, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to hear about your dog. Sad times. --Elen of the Roads (talk) 12:38, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

My condolences to you Sandy. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:50, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm very sorry to hear about your loss, Sandy. Your companion at least had the solace of being your friend for so long.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:40, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm so sorry, Sandy. It's hard to believe how attached we get to our furry babies.... At least he isn't suffering now. Karanacs (talk) 14:43, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

I cried every day for two weeks after I had to put my cat down. Then I saw that crazy whore on The Office where Dwight put her cat in the freezer and she was remembering all the good times she had with her cat, dressing up for Halloween together ("Just a couple of kitty cats") and I can't reconcile the way my statements about my cat sound any different than some other crazy whore. Anyway, screw 'em. I'm sorry and I know it sucks. If you take my advice, you would self-medicate into oblivion. Others, like the producers of Intervention, might disagree. Whatev. --Moni3 (talk) 14:57, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thank you all for the kind thoughts. Boris, I don't think stealing food will be foremost on his mind; I'm sure he got his manhood back in doggie heaven, and Ginger should consider herself lucky that he's charming, handsome, devoted and frisky.  Poor boy died a virgin, so there must be a reward in doggie heaven.  Moni, Moni, Moni: that was a great episode!!
 * After crying all night, missing him like hell, here's how my morning went:
 * Bluejays invaded at 6 am: those things make unbearable noise. I went out on the back deck and cursed them, to no avail, then put in earplugs and went back to sleep again.
 * Not just one, but three neighbors decided to do their tree work today, starting at 8 am. The din of chippers, chain saws and trucks from all sides penetrated my ear plugs.  I buried my head under pillows and went back to sleep.
 * The doorbell rang at 10 am. Lo and behold, UPS chose today to deliver my Christmas cards, which included pictures of my dogs, that I took after the vet assured me he was good for another few months.  Now I'll be sending Christmas cards of my departed dog.  But that wasn't the worst insult:
 * I went out on the back deck to again curse the bluejays and tree chippers. And there were three turkey vultures perched in the tree over the gravesite I dug for my little guy, who will also probably go this winter (big guy was cremated).  I think I'll go buy a BB gun and use the damn vultures for target practice, while I get in touch with my inner bitch.
 * A bad dress rehearsal foretells a good opening night. Considering December 1 stinks, the rest of December should be grand, and 2010 will be my year.  Thank you all for the kind thoughts.  Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ugh. BB guns are great. We picked up a new kitty yesterday evening, a very red tabby male (who is at the vet as we speak ... becoming an it). He will be named "Rufus" after my favorite Anglo-Norman king William II of England. Hopefully, your month gets better like mine did! Ealdgyth - Talk 18:26, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Post-coffee PS. I failed to mention the good things.  Yesterday was my son's Saints Day, and my dog's passing was as peaceful, timely and painless as could be, under the circumstances.  I had a good two months to prepare, he made it through Thanksgiving without suffering, and when the time came, the decision was clear.  I am thankful.  I'll be in better shape by tomorrow!  Thank you again to all who sent comforting thoughts.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm sorry to hear that as well; you are "Go for the BB Gun Injection", by the way. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 06:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm so sorry about your dog, Sandy, :( I lost my boy, Ozzy, Thanksgiving Morning...vet called me as I was leaving for Mexico, i couldn't even be there for him when they put him down. Fourth dog I've lost on a Holiday.  Feel like I lost a brother/son/best friend all at once. --Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 22:58, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

My condolences as well, ones friends are not merely those who type in cyberspace and sip lattes while shopping, etc. The kind ears and unfettered love of a companion friend is not easily found or replaced. We truly learn to see love for the gift that it can be and I hope you and yours bounce back and honor your dog in only the best ways possible - except peeing on trees. -- Banj e b oi   23:09, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

FAC for withdrawal
Hi Sandy, sorry about your dog, we lost the family cat last month. The nominator has requested the withdrawal of this FAC. -MBK004 03:23, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I have taken care of this. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, as always. I saw one that hadn't consulted significant contributors, but was too bleary eyed to deal with it.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:15, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem; here's the link for your convenience. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:10, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

Question
Would you say the responses to this FAC were minimal because it was a "woah, this is way sub-par, you don't know what you're doing" or more of a "what a boring, niche subject"? I would much prefer the latter, but I would appreciate your honesty. :)  upstate NYer  03:28, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * UpstateNYer, I would have to say it's more because of a chronic lack of FAC reviewers. It's really unfortunate for nominators, but this time of year is always the hardest on review processes. Your best bet is to resolve the comments that were brought up during the FAC, and then re-nominate (the norm is to wait at least a week or two before re-submitting). Hopefully you'll have better luck next time. Dabomb87 (talk) 05:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I've just been in contact with the woman that wrote the most recent book I use as a source, so I'm hopeful after a bit of coaxing, she may read the article and tell me what she thinks. She's currently working on a biography of the guy, but it won't be out for a year. Lucky for her she is fluent in old Dutch, so these sources are much easier for her. But considering I didn't have a direct biography of the guy, I think it came out pretty well. I won't nom for a little while, I don't think (I have more to add from this new source), but I also think the oppose was a bit unfair (especially after I went through and did almost everything asked with respect to the refs, which took a lot of time). I just don't agree with the other aspect of referencing the "primary" vs. "secondary" parts of a source, especially when it was all originally in Dutch, and is therefore interpreted to begin with.  upstate NYer  02:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Are you yourself Dutch UpstateNYer? I ask because much of the prose doesn't seem to be idiomatic, such as: "Much of van Rensselaer's work is unknown during his early life". That really doesn't make sense. --Malleus Fatuorum 05:31, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Nope; English is my first and only language (though, in my defense, I am an engineer and not a PhD in English literature :) ). It makes sense to me, but I guess it could be reworded to something like "Much of van Rensselaer's early life is unknown to today's historians."? Much of the prose, by the way, is literally copy+pasted from some of the sources. Much of the wording is as good or better than what I could have come up with (and of course these sources are PD and a note is made at the bottom of the article).  upstate NYer  02:54, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You realise that even if its PD, even if you reference the work, failing to quote the work when using it directly like that is plagiarism. Fifelfoo (talk) 03:07, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Which is completely legal. In fact, nothing stops me from using the entire book as the article. I wouldn't do that; I'm just making the point. This isn't a high school essay, it's a written work open to the world meant to convey information in the best and most general way possible. Somebody already did that, and did it well. I'm just consolidating and choosing the best passages to include. The only issue that comes up is moral, which isn't really valid in my view since they author's been dead for probably 50 years and the book is out of print.  upstate NYer  04:08, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Indeed, I was just about to post that link myself. It isn't just a moral issue - it is a practical one of keeping ideas and prose attributed to the correct sources. Awadewit (talk) 04:12, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Dispatch is TLDR. The issue is clearly stated at the bottom of the article, even including a little PD icon. I'm not claiming authorship (in fact, I don't matter; it just happens that I'm the only editor on the article, but it could theoretically be dozens), nor is Wikipedia and each batch of copy+paste is referenced specifically to the page. If I still closed at FPC, I wouldn't take "Oppose - on moral grounds" as a legit vote mainly because WP isn't censored and per the philosophy that it's more important to get the information out there. But at the same time, I more than respect the fact that this was written by a certain individual, which is why I note the use of direct text at the bottom and cite each passage to the page of the document (including direct link to the page at Google Books, which I realize some people don't care about, but is probably one of the greatest conveniences Google offers when it comes to research). If FAC doesn't like this usage (though it's not in the criteria), then the article, as a source of sound, accurate, and well-written information, is better off not being an FA and being left as is. That's an interesting paradox.  upstate NYer  04:19, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * "TLDR" sayeth an FA researcher and writer? No reason to continue this discussion. Life is too short. I'm going to go read. Awadewit (talk) 04:28, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Exactly, because I have better things to do than read a >1000-word dispatch (btw, I have yet to become an FA researcher or writer, but thanks for the moral support). Article is fully referenced and "plagiarism" is clearly noted. This follows the rules; and still, better off as a GA because FA may require taking some of its content away (thereby decreasing its overall quality)? Again: interesting paradox.  upstate NYer  04:40, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The problem now, though, is beyond FAC; you've admitted that the article is plagiarized, and that's an issue on Wiki whether it goes to FAC or not, and would also require the article to be delisted as a GA. I do suggest that you read the Dispatch.  Material taken directly from other sources must be in quotes. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:59, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * WP:Plagiarism says otherwise. Each direct text quote is sourced clearly, to the page, and nothing comes from any "primary" section of the one source. Below the references section, it is clearly stated that there is copied text from a number of (expired) documents. I mean, why would something like 1911 exist if it weren't okay? The guideline seems pretty clear to me.  upstate NYer  05:11, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you read the dispatch, you would see the problems. Ah, the paradox. 15:10, 3 December 2009 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Awadewit (talk • contribs)
 * I read the dispatch. It is nothing more than an editorial, though one with good intentions (as most dispatches are, having co-authored one myself). But it doesn't say much to keep sending me to an editorial that was partially authored by you. The guideline is there and - technicalities and politics of the issue aside - promotes what is currently agreed upon by consensus, which is what I have stayed within the limits of. So I have a guideline on my side and you have a self-authored opinion column. I'm obviously not going to renominate this article, for fear of the butcher block, but nothing wrong has been done with respect to citing and crediting sources. "Ah, the paradox", indeed.  upstate NYer  23:22, 3 December 2009 (UTC)

FYI - FAC recusals
Hi Sandy. Since you did such a great job repeatedly going through FAC this past weekend, I've been reviewing in the hopes that we can close more nominations this coming weekend. Just in case you don't notice, here's a list of the noms I've worked on (links go to the FAC): Unfortunately, I've been mostly entering opposes...I don't think I'm in a bad mood or being too mean, but I'm sure others will let me know if they think I'm a nutcase. Karanacs (talk) 17:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Denton, Texas
 * 1997 Qayen earthquake
 * Rebbie Jackson
 * Hurricane Bret (1999)
 * Hurricane Fifi
 * Tender Mercies
 * The Chinese Restaurant


 * No, I think you were spot on in both the ones I reviewed/am reviewing as well (Denton and Chinese Restaurant). cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:55, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

My heartfelt condolences

 * I recently deleted the Wikipedia image of my dog (I won't say his name, 'cause I've mentioned it on my webpages etc.). But to me, the dumb dog is very much a member of the family. Since he's 13, I know a day will come when he will be gone. I dread that day. My heart goes out to you (a corny phrase, but true). Ling.Nut (talk) 01:12, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you, Dear Nutty One :) I really appreciate the thoughts.  He was a magnificent dog, a beauty, and a great companion.  When your time comes, I hope it's as peaceful and clear as ours was.  Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:20, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Spring pruning
We-ell, it's springtime and I have been doing my springtime pruning at schizophrenia, but now it is summer so I shall stop and rest for a moment. MOre pruning needed? Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:57, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm glad you were able to do that; I'll look in after I catch up from my day off and finish my Arb Votes page. Best, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:59, 2 December 2009 (UTC)

Recusals
Moved from my archives, where it was incorrectly posted by User:NancyHeise -- I have resonded on Raul's talk. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 22:24, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks for letting me know several days weeks after the fact. Not everyone reads your talk page Sandy. I don't. I think posting it on the Catholic Church talk page would have been a more effective way to tell people, especially me - the person complaining about Karanac's neutrality and FAC assistance in the first place. I have a talk page too that could have sufficed as well.  Nancy Heise    talk  19:38, 2 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sandy, I did not know that I was posting to your archived talk page. I followed the link you supplied in your 4:53, 2 December post provided to me in the hatted part of this section of the FAC talk page. Without looking at the date I thought Karanacs had posted the recusal recently when it fact it was several weeks old. Accordingly, I struck "days" in my post above and replaced it with "weeks". Thanks.   Nancy Heise    talk  20:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestion
Thanks for the suggestion. I must admit I'd dug my heels in, something that's completely out of character for me. ;-) --Malleus Fatuorum 23:46, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Whatdya dig your heels into? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:47, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * This. --Malleus Fatuorum 23:52, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * You're supposed to give me something funnier than that :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:58, 3 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Dork! --Malleus Fatuorum 00:00, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thief! Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 00:11, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Now I've gotta read 54 pages of data collection methodology... :P. At least I'll have something to talk about down the pub tonight. Fifelfoo (talk) 01:17, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I'm coming around to the view that CPI is a rather brutal tool, and not really useful for historical periods much longer than one person's lifetime, which is why I altered the calculation basis in Gunpowder Plot, as explained in the notes that SandyG suggested be introduced. I'm also thinking that it might be worth writing a few more templates, for average earnings or GDP equivalence, for instance. So although I didn't agree with you, you have made me think Fifelfoo. --Malleus Fatuorum 01:37, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * One key issue is whether you are talking about rich people's prices/money, or poor people's, since the relationship between them has moved drastically. A tricky subject. Johnbod (talk) 02:08, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Not necessarily so tricky. Depends on whether you're looking at average wages, an individual's purchasing power, or the purchasing power of the state. The point though is that some kind of plausible conversion is needed to make sense of a 17th-century recusancy fine of one shilling a week, for instance, which is otherwise quite meaningless to a 21st-century readership. --Malleus Fatuorum 03:27, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I went ahead and promoted because 1) MF is (in spite of his ... ummm .. reputation :) a very reasonable editor and I know he'll work to get it right, and 2) I thought some approximation was better for our readers than no approximation. (I'm not insensitive to Fifelfoo's concern, as I was in banking in one of my former lives.)  Another solution might be to attribute inline, something like, "... equivalent to over £10 million as of 2008 according to blah, blah, blah ... "  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 05:32, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, I read Officer's paper on their construction of the data series. They outline, explicitly, the flaws I referred to.  I'll be BOLD in about 3 days time and modify the notes to outline the reservations the authors have with their own series, but noting that its important to have a comparison to assist modern readers and that this comparison, while contentious, is the best of contemporary scholarship.  Officers paper on their construction of the series provides an adequate outline of the literature in the field.  Perhaps I ought to stub Wage Price Series of the United Kingdom Fifelfoo (talk) 11:12, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * It would be good to clarify this issue to your satisfaction Fifelfoo. It crops up in other FAs as well, this one for instance, so it would be good to have a standardised way of dealing with it, perhaps even with some guidelines and examples of which time series to use (CPI, average earnings, etc.,) for diferent purposes. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:15, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * The stub is a good idea, because then the text could attribute ( "... equivalent to over £10 million as of 2008 according to the Wage Price Series of the United Kingdom ... " ) and readers would know the limitations of the estimate without the need for lengthy footnotes. But I know you two will work something out that will benefit other articles.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 13:20, 4 December 2009 (UTC)


 * I like the stub idea too. --Malleus Fatuorum 13:24, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

RFA
Per your WR post, do you want me to nom you for adminship? Sandy Georgia (Talk) 15:43, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sure. Thank you for offering.  I'm not sure if it should be done this month, however.  Perhaps after the elections are over? Cla68 (talk) 00:02, 4 December 2009 (UTC)

Quick question
I'm pretty sure it was established that infoboxes are not mandatory. Am I correct? If so, do you know if anywhere I can look for details? WesleyDodds (talk) 03:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Correct, but I can't point you anywhere, because, well ... there's no place that mandates them. If someone tells you otherwise, tell *them* to produce the guideline :) Where has Ceoil been? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:21, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I asked because I initiated discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Albums about removing reviews from the album infobox. Consensus agreed with this, but as a result of the discussion people not only want to move the reviews to a separate infobox, but make that infobox mandatory. I mean, the prose should be the focus in the first place, right? As for the Irishman, Ceoil told me either here or elsewhere on the internets that he's travelling for a bit. WesleyDodds (talk) 04:30, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I hate infoboxes; they're a maintenance nightmare, and just clunk up the top of the article with info that's repeated elsewhere. MilHist seems to make good use of them, though; if Albums goes that way with a guideline, you might want to check the MilHist guideline.  Yes, I thought Ceoil was traveling, but just wanted to be sure all was well ... Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:36, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Even looking at MILMOS, they don't say anywhere that they are mandatory--just how to use them. I do recall discussions on the FAC talk page and FAR about them being optional (in particular, I recall Ceoil taking out the infobox for William Butler Yeats). WesleyDodds (talk) 04:47, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * There's a bar at the top of WT:FAC for searching the FAC archives; you might find something there. G'night!  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:51, 5 December 2009 (UTC)

So...
Is FAC in need of reviewers? I can't believe I'm asking this. Surely I will regret it in 5, 4, 3, 2... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:59, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * We are always in need of reviewers! Jump on in! We don't bite.. really... Ealdgyth - Talk 16:00, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Consider yourself, regrettably, one of us. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:06, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, Fv, what really needs review is Cystic fibrosis at FAR. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:09, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Where can I add some sources for improvement? I see FARC has started. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 17:30, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, will do some very superficial work on this tonight (sourcing and content only). Fvasconcellos (t·c) 22:20, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Too many medical FAs are ignoring WP:MEDRS and not relying on secondary reviews, resulting in WP:UNDUE issues and WP:RECENTISM; thanks for working on it, Fv. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 13:36, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No problem. If no one can access some high-quality sources, though, I won't be able to do much. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

...and you can thank Dr pda for providing those sources :) Will see what I can do over the week. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 15:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

The Chinese Restaurant
Hi, I don't mean to be mean, but I do not want to wait a few weeks. I don't see what will happen if I wait a while, two copy-editors had literally just copy-edited the article when it was archived.-- Music 26/  11  21:22, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oh, and I forgot to say, I'm sorry I said "you guys suck", but I think it is kinda mean that a FAC is archived when all issues have been resolved, if you want users to wait before re-nominating an article, you should make it a rule, at this time I think users are free to re-nominate whenever they want, especially in a situation like this one.-- Music 26/  11  21:26, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Please see the WP:FAC instructions and wait a few weeks (and the article still has copyedit issues-- see User talk:Karanacs. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:34, 5 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Sandy, see this too. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:43, 6 December 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Sandy Georgia (Talk) 13:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Introduction to evolution
An editor has nominated one or more articles which you have created or worked on, for deletion. The nominated article is Introduction to evolution. We appreciate your contributions, but the nominator doesn't believe that the article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion and has explained why in his/her nomination (see also Notability and "What Wikipedia is not").

Your opinions on whether the article meets inclusion criteria and what should be done with the article are welcome; please participate in the discussion(s) by adding your comments to Articles for deletion/Introduction to evolution (3rd nomination). Please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes ( ~ ).

You may also edit the article during the discussion to improve it but should not remove the articles for deletion template from the top of the article; such removal will not end the deletion debate.

Please note: This is an automatic notification by a bot. I have nothing to do with this article or the deletion nomination, and can't do anything about it. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 01:14, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Richard Parker
I'm thinking of writing a new FAC, but before I invest time and effort, I'd welcome your views on whether there is any mileage in this proposal. I'll ask Karanacs too. Thanks  Jimfbleak -  talk to me?  13:15, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

what is this about?
I don't understand exactly why are you running the opposition campaign you appear to on the Jan 1 nomination. You opposed before the blurb was written out and in less than 15 mins from the original addition, and you have written two more extra replies to other comments with further examples of opposition to the nom. Nergaal (talk) 06:49, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * If you'd like to remove the personal attack, and review WP:AGF, I'll be happy to answer. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 13:34, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Don't worry, it wasn't intended to be a personal attack, and if it did sound like one, I am sorry for the misunderstanding. Nergaal (talk) 16:37, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * running a "hate campaign" certainly reads like a personal attack to me. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 16:44, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it wasn't intended to be a personal attack. Nergaal (talk) 16:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * You dwarf planet hater, you. I'm sick of you pushing your moonist agenda. Yomangani talk 16:51, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * snark* *spew* --Moni3 (talk) 16:57, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Raul has asked that the community nominate five articles at a time for TFA; the page rules are designed to optimize the chances that nominators can get worthy articles on TFA, but they work best when the community shows cooperation. By adding a lower point article, when there are already two 400-yr anniversaries for moons on the pending template, you guarantee that another nominator can't get the spot, even though when the other moons are eligible to be added to the page, Ceres will be bumped. I opposed immediately because the 400-yr moons have been on the pending template for quite a while, so adding another astronomy article-- which will end up bumped-- is only keeping other nominators from getting a slot. It's not right to keep other nominators off the page, when this nomination will be bumped soon. Also, if you would show a collaborative spirit, and accept one of the dates put forward by Yoman, you will earn the kind of respect that Ceranthor did when he gave up his slot in the interest of collaboration.  I hope this helps, 16:59, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * With 3 pts I am not sure it would get bumped (the 1pts thing though changes things). Anyways, while there still was a 1pts nomination listed without any supports (the 24/25 Dec one) I don't think it actually takes up a spot. Furthermore, a significant number of people supported it and opposes were not related to the worthines/quality of being on the mainpage. Just a quick clarification: Ceranthor did when he gave up his slot in the interest of collaboration I have no idea what is this about. Nergaal (talk) 01:52, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Stimming and Stereotypy
Let's put it this way: when I just now did a Google Scholar search for sources matching both terms, and the only relevant one I found in the first two pages was a quote from Wikipedia "It is shorthand for self-stimulation, and a stereotypy is referred to as stimming under the hypothesis that it has a function related to sensory input"! This was in Smith & Verspoor 2009, published as a "Philosophy and Discussion" piece in Homoeopathic Links, not exactly the most reliable of sources.

Anyway, as far as I can make it out, there is a popular notion or myth that stereotypies in autism constitute a form of self-stimulation. This popular notion is important enough to be mentioned (and we do have a source on it, Nind & Kellet 2002, ), but it's not worth more than a sentence.

I briefly looked for a reliable source for the claim that stereotypies are called "tweaking" among meth users; the best I found was a non-peer-reviewed research report that says that heavy use can lead to "what researchers have termed stereotyped behavior—compulsive repetitive behavior such as plucking at some object for hours, disassembling electronic devices, clocks, or motors, obsessive grooming, or picking at the skin. In the U.S. this behavior has sometimes been called tweaking (a term also used to describe a meth run) while in Sweden it is referred to as punding." (Weisheit, undated PDF).

Eubulides (talk) 14:45, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

ISS FAC4.
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, or who has contributed to the article recently, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Featured Article Candidacy with any suggestions you have for article improvements (and being bold and making those changes), whether or not you feel any issues you have previously raised have been dealt with, and, ultimately, if you believe the article meets the Featured Article guidelines. This is the fourth FAC for this article, and it'd be great to have it pass. Many thanks in advance, Colds7ream (talk) 16:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

re Basshunter
Semi prot for one year. Cheers, Cirt (talk) 18:10, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you so much ! Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:58, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
 * No worries, Cirt (talk) 19:26, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Citation format in Stereotypy
Thanks for repairing Stereotypy (hey, who said this was a thankless job!). I notice you added a citation in Vancouver format and took the opportunity to switch that article to use Vancouver format for the other citations, using new templates cit journal etc. that I recently developed for that purpose. These templates are experimental, so please feel free to back out that change if there's something wrong about it; you can just change " " to " ". It's partly my attempt to cut down on the page bloat from the citation templates (see Wikipedia talk:Citing sources ). I thought I'd try it out on a smaller article before inflicting it on Autism etc. Eubulides (talk) 18:38, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I think I left a mess of mixed citation formatting there, but ran out of time to finish ... if you want to repair them to any format you wish, it's fine with me! If not, I'll eventually get to it, but I haven't yet learned completely your new tricks.  Thanks for getting those articles back on track; my Wiki time is sporadic and intermittent.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:00, 8 December 2009 (UTC)

Question
I just have a question on the "restarted" Ode on a Grecian Urn" FAC. When a nom is restarted, does that mean the previous comments will or will not be weighted for consensus. In other words, should those who have placed support or oppose views revisit the page and post new comments? If so, what would be the etiquette on notifying those who have done previous readings? And if the nominators are allowed to notify previous reviewers, should they notify them all to avoid canvassing? Thanks again for you help. Mrathel (talk) 13:41, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * A restart is essentially a new FAC, when the current page has become too muddled to sort. You can ask previous reviewers to revisit, as long as you avoid wording that is canvassing.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 14:22, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Just realized that I forgot to say thanks. I would hate to give the impression that your helpfulness has gone unnoticed, and I do appreciate it. Mrathel (talk) 19:05, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Reviewing
Just so you don't miss it, I'm being mean again and have reviewed Featured article candidates/Post Oak Mall/archive1. I may also be considered to have a conflict of interest there, as many moons ago I worked at a store in that mall. I left a note to that effect. I may not be on-wiki much after the next few hours due to scheduled massive house-cleaning/cookie baking/finishing Christmas preparations/losing-last-of-my-sanity time, but I'm planning to check email periodically. If you need anything from me, that may be the only way to get my attention before late Monday. Karanacs (talk) 17:59, 10 December 2009 (UTC)

Sound film FARC
Thanks for giving me things to work with (and for working with those without specifics). Best, Dan—DCGeist (talk) 09:32, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

The New York Times
Re : dunno if it matters to you, but Citing Medicine's guideline for citations to newspaper articles says it's OK to omit the leading "The". I'm coming more and more to prefer brevity in citations myself. Eubulides (talk) 01:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * ah, ha ! Thanks for letting me know (will save me lots of trouble on lots of articles).  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:45, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Archived?
Can you explain why this was closed as unsuccessful? Sure, several issues were outstanding, but it wasn't as though it was the oldest candidate on the page. For instance, why was this article archived, when articles nominated over a week earlier are still there? As it happens, the one "decline" for the candidate was based on reasoning other reviewers disagreed with, so I decided not to act upon it. Thanks for your time. — Anonymous Dissident  Talk 01:44, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not finished archiving, I need to read some of the longer FACs more carefully, and we have many FACs that have been up two, three weeks, even more, and getting no support; at some point, they have to close. Others that I left on my first pass either had more support or less opposition.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:46, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Colds7ream (talk) 18:47, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

FA Source question
On Google Book results, the 2nd one, says Cody was born in Davenport, do I just do a standard book reference for this, or do I need to link to the search results too, so other people can see that he was born in Davenport? C T J F 8 3 chat 20:22, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Reference it like a book, but include the url to the page as a courtesy. Not all google books will show up for all folks, preview there is kinda wonky. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:25, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ya, clicking on it is useless, but what is available is sufficient for FA, correct? C T J F 8 3  chat 20:27, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Image reviews/Brownlee
Thanks. I generally only do full reviews of stuff on which I consider myself reasonably literate, and I sort of use image reviews as a way of contributing when there's not much there that I'm comfortable reviewing. So I'll keep doing image reviews as long as people don't nominate much in the way of political history/biography (though I can do the Aussie war heroes in a pinch, and will try to get to Walter Peeler next week sometime). Steve Smith (talk) 20:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

FAC archival page
I think there is some problem there. November 2009 page has 5 passed FAs that were passed by you in December, so they should go to December 2009 folder. - DSachan (talk) 21:01, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know, but I thought I fixed that ... are you seeing something else? I had forgotten to update my bookmarks for the new month.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * ah, ha, found ... no wonder December promotions were looking so dismal! (They're still running way behind).  Thanks again, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:02, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Oops, they were 4, not 5. Anyhow, you already fixed them. Thanks. - DSachan (talk) 07:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

thanks
Hi Sandy, thanks, i think the overall quality of articles on wiki is increasing all the time, keep up all the hard work - let me know if you need any help on anything Tom B (talk) 21:17, 12 December 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Family Guy/archive2
Hi Sandy. Can you withdraw this FAC? The nominator wants it to be withdrawn. Thanks,  The left orium  23:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Thanks sandy-- Pedro J. the rookie 17:13, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

FAC question
Hello. I had previously nominated Featured article candidates/Supernatural (season 2)/archive1 for FAC a couple weeks ago, but withdrew it when some reviewers said that the prose needed work. I've copy-edited the article, and had one of the copy-editor guild members look it over, too. Since I withdrew the nomination instead of letting it be closed, I was wondering what the requirements for the renomination procedure was. I know that normally I am supposed to address all the concerns first, but since the main concern was that it needed copy-editing, I wasn't sure what the next step was. Thanks. Ω pho  is  12:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Several weeks have passed, so you're free to re-nominate it, but I wiser course of action would be to ask either of the two previous opposers if they think the copyedit needs have been met before re-nomming. Having a copyedit done doesn't necessarily mean copyedit needs are met. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 19:57, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/A Rugrats Chanukah/archive1
Thank you for removing it until further notice. I understand why, but I'm a little bit unclear about something. I noticed that Weight Gain 4000 was nominated at the same time as Tender Mercies was, both from the same nominator. Is this because there was a clearer consensus on that article then there is for Dan Povenmire?  The Flash  {talk} 18:08, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * When the second was added, the first had two Supports and no substantial Opposes. Further, I sometimes miss subsequent noms.  It's not a matter of how many Supports and Opposes, as much as the strength of the opposes; reliability of sources is always important and can be difficult to sort during a FAC.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the response. Can you please archive the FAC? I've decided that there are simply too many issues brought up and the FAC was truly added prematurely. Thanks,  The Flash  {talk} 22:59, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Povenmire? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:21, 13 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, please. :)  The Flash  {talk} 23:42, 13 December 2009 (UTC)

When you get a moment
...could I trouble you to read through this and offer feedback? I am trying to get our academy up and running ASAP now that I am back, but to do that I need input from others who have better understandings of certain wikipedia-wide operations.

Also, I gather from the number of posts ahead of mine that you lost a dog. Although I am not sure of the whole story (I've been more or less absent the last two months) I offer my condolences as well. Loss is always a hard thing to take, but the hurt is amplified by the amount of time we had before the loss. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:54, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

FA downgrades
Hi Sandy, I hope that I am not bothering you when you are busy. I have noticed that when FA's are downgraded, they seem to be downgraded to B class articles. Is this true or are my perceptions wrong? Should FA's not be downgraded to good article status? I am asking because I think if this is the case that it would motivate editors not to go beyond a good article, knowing if the standards slipped a bit over time, it would go straight to a B article rather than GA.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  19:55, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * When FA status is removed, the article is not assessed as a GA. This is because many of the former FAs don't meet current GA status (GA standards have risen too).  The article would need to be assessed against the GA criteria, and FAR is designed to only assess against the FA criteria. Karanacs (talk) 20:34, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * That is a shame for the articles which would still meet GA standards but like you say FAR is not designed to assess against GA criteria; it would be nice if that could be changed one day. Thank you for replying.-- Literature geek |  T@1k?  10:38, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Did you get the article I sent you
Hey Sandy

Did you get the article on Trichotillomania I sent you? Doc James (talk · contribs · email) 21:23, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Will look now; sorry, just got home, was going through my watchlist, and came across that unfortunate mess. Concerned because Una has done such things before.  Will check my mail; thanks!  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
 * The formatting came through in poor shape, so I've got to reformat it in Word to read it, but the first thing I noticed was University of South Florida ... which has been the source of some very poor research papers on TS. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 21:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)

Arbitration Motion's regarding Mattisse
The Arbitration Committee has passed a motion amending Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse The full voting and discussion for the original clarification and motions can be found here
 * is placed under a conduct probation for one year. Any of Mattisse's mentors may impose sanctions on his or her own discretion if, despite being warned or otherwise advised, Mattisse repeatedly or seriously fails to adhere to any expected standards of behavior and decorum.
 * Editors are reminded that baiting, antagonistic comments, and other such behavior is disruptive. Uninvolved administrators are encouraged to handle such circumstances as they would any other disruptive conduct, including appropriate warnings and advice, short page bans, as well as escalating blocks for repeated or egregious misconduct.
 * Editing of the the page User:Mattisse/Monitoring, as well as its talk page and any other pages created for the purposes of carrying out the mentorship, shall be limited to and her mentors for the duration of the mentorship. Users wishing to comment upon any aspect of the mentorship may contact the mentors directly, or on a subpage designated for such a purpose.  Modified by next two motions. 
 * "Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Alerts" will be set up for the community to report issues to the mentors.
 * User:Mattisse/Monitoring is moved to "Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Mattisse/Monitoring".

For the Arbitration Committee,

Seddon talk|WikimediaUK 01:18, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Original Annoucement

contacting you
Sandy, a friend of a friend from your husband's hometown wants to get in touch with you. where can i send you his email address and number?Verdadseadicha (talk) 21:19, 17 December 2009 (UTC)


 * ¡Qué mensaje misterioso! No me acuerdo haber mencionado aquí ni un esposo ni su lugar de nacimiento ... un hombre que pueda llamarse "my husband" debe ser un macho excepcional!  Cualquier persona me puede mandar correo electronico por "E-mail this user" a la izquierda de esta pagina, pero eso no quiere decir que yo devuelva el favor :) Cordialmente, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:01, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Sandy is married to Wikipedia. MastCell Talk 22:12, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Ya missed that one by a long mile, dear MC :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:14, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * correo electronico - what a cool term :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 22:29, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * 'Ya like that one? How about la red mundial? Or descarado? While we're on the topic, I'm still waiting for Yomangani to show up and fill a big hole in la red mundial; the lack of an adequate translation for this song anywhere on the 'net. I believe it can't be done without references to Prince Charles' love life, but if Yoman can do it, there's a full-pretzel bonus in it for him. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 22:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Is that an entree, or a dessert? MastCell Talk 22:37, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Neither. If'n you have to ask, you should turn off your computer and get some strawberries and chocolate to go with your champagne :)  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:40, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Way ahead of you. I never edit Wikipedia without a supply of chocolate-covered strawberries and Veuve Clicquot at hand. I'm not an animal. MastCell Talk 01:33, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I sure can't speak Spanish, but at least I can read it :P I love the language just because the extra punctuation always makes it sound more exaggerated in my head (maybe that explains the telenovelas). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 23:42, 17 December 2009 (UTC)

Mujer, donde carrizo esta el "email this user" seguro soy bruto pero no veo esa opcion. dame una manito y explicame donde en la pagina esta y te envio el mensaje que me pidio un pana tuyo que te hiciera llegar. Gui guich ju a merri crisma an a hapi niu yir!Verdadseadicha (talk) 17:46, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Que cariso "pana mio"? Lo dudo!  Ve al lado izquierda de la pagina.  Hay un "Toolbox" en el margin, despues:
 * What links here
 * Related changes
 * User contributions
 * Logs
 * E-mail this user
 * Upload file
 * etcetera ... Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:34, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Is it customary to address someone as "Woman" in Spanish? I reserve that term of endearment to Mrs. Moni when she's driving me right up the freakin' wall. Which is...you know...hardly ever... --Moni3 (talk) 18:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes, when you're close friends. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Might it be worth it to you to put up a warning/caution notice on your talk page that statements written in Spanish will be put through Google translator by the majority English readers of your page, if not for the pure hilarity of whatever that thing was about bamboo and corduroy and gross'm? Perhaps notifying such contributors that they may sound like Jar Jar Binks would be a courtesy. --Moni3 (talk) 18:51, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Google translator doesn't work at all. Period. Plain and simple. Remember that when we get translated articles at FAC. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:11, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Where is bamboo coming from? It's much better to translate carrizo as male anatomy.  Эlcobbola  talk 19:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm holding my tongue on bamboo :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 19:25, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Should that read, not as Google translator suggests "Women where bamboo is the", but as "Woman, where the dick is the"? Skipping the fact that someone might ask where the dick is something, which I'm assuming is idiosyncratic to regional Spanish, how often do people ask on your talk page by addressing you as "Woman" and asking you where the dick is something? And what are you holding your tongue on really? --Moni3 (talk) 19:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Cannibalism and sexual innuendo. Today is an interesting day to be a talk page stalker. ;)  Was I the only one who took way too long to realize that the last sentence wasn't Spanish but funkily-spelled English? Karanacs (talk) 19:43, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * güat is rang güit iu? Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 20:03, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hell, I speak Spanish and I have no idea what the heck Sandy meant with the cariso line. Although "Where the hell is the email this user link" is sort of understood... hombres, no se fijen tanto en pequeñeces... Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 20:01, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Por lo que me cuentan, los hombres siempre se preocupen por pequeñeces, por mas que las mujeres le dicen que no importa :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:06, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey, careful spreading that nonsense around - you'll jeopardize my lucrative male-enhancement medical practice, and then I'll have no choice but to go join ILADS or something... MastCell Talk 20:17, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Deberían aprender que no son las pequeñeces las que importan, sino lo que hacen con ellas... :P Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 20:29, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Somebody run "preaching to the choir" through Google :) MC, you should give up on bats and start watching the mating habits of squirrels.  Very Darwinian; I feel for the dumb slow one.  He can't outchase the fast one, so he hides behind the wood pile, hoping to ambush her.  But every time he stands up to see if she's approaching, his white belly gives him away.  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 20:40, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I didn't realize female squirrels were so picky . Besides, why hasn't someone Intelligently Designed darker belly fur for the dumb, slow squirrel? MastCell Talk 23:13, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm watching grey squirrels. (No comment on ID and the slow dumbo :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:21, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Reminds me of that time when a family friend had squirrels inside their house. They got in, somehow, through some opening on the roof.  ceran  thor 23:57, 18 December 2009 (UTC)

Take care
It was good, it was bad, it was good and bad. Keep Johnson looking good. Ottava Rima (talk) 05:19, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1997 Qayen earthquake/archive1
Hi Sandy, I asked Karanacs to tell me what else was needed for this article but she hasn't responded. (e-mail) Do you think it's ready for promotion, and if not, what do you think it still needs?  ceran  thor 14:26, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Ack, I missed Tony1's new comments! Disregard the above.  ceran  thor 14:29, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

no chica, es en serio
Mija, fui al bendito toolbox y no esta la opcion de "email this user" te lo juro por mi madre. no hay nada. entonces decidi intentar el fulano "try beta" solo esta: What links here Related changes User contributions Logs Upload file Special pages y ya....no hay mas naaa. es en serio.

Sera que no tengo una cuenta de usuario que me permite mandate un correito? como hacemos? escribire en criollo pa que ni mandrake entienda. tu pana ya ha tenio contarto contigo pero estravio el correo. hagamos una cosa. que tal si nos anotamos conque el le mande un correito al marido tuyo por rostrolibro? :-) Verdadseadicha (talk) 01:17, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * (Comment, sorry for not writing in Spanish - I can kind of understand it but certainly not write it.) You probably have not set up an e-mail address yourself. You can do that under "Preferences" (in the top right corner) and then go to the bottom where it says "E-mail (optional)", and enter your e-mail address. Ucucha 01:21, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * As far as I know, all logged in editors should be able to see my "e-mail this user" link in the toolbox at the left hand side of my talk page. Are you looking at the toolbox on my talk page, or elsewhere? Someone else may know if you need to change something in your preferences settings to be able to e-mail other users, or why you don't see the "e-mail this user" link on my talk page, but plenty of people e-mail me, so I know my link is enabled. Since I doubt that your friend knows "el marido mio", sending an e-mail to a stranger about me might not be the best idea; keep trying to e-mail me. Or tell me, if this person has been in contact with me, what are his initials (nombre y doble appellido), and I will tell you if I know him. Please do not put any names here.
 * (ec) Ucucha is saying that lo mas probable es que no ves mi "e-mail this user" link porque tu no has establecido e-mail en tus preferencias. Hago lo tuyo por tu lado, y despues ve si aqui sale el link. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:26, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Vergacion! tenia razon UCUCHA. andaba yo mas perdio que un mucuchies ciego en el paramo. ya active la cuestion del imeil por lo tanto ya te mando algo por ahi!Verdadseadicha (talk) 01:34, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Esperando ... Sandy Georgia (Talk) 01:41, 20 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Recibido. Me hiciste pasar un buen susto por nada ... no me sigues proponiendo ningun maldito marido :)  Escribo mañana cuando tenga más tiempito.    Saludos, Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 01:48, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

ay mi sen~ora, perdoneme... pero como le dije, ya cumpli con el mensaje. pasa ud. buenas noches!Verdadseadicha (talk) 02:12, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Zero rollo, pana ... despues hablamos. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 02:37, 20 December 2009 (UTC)

Why such a fast FAC closure?
Both Economic history of China (pre-1911) FAC's were closed in only a few days, while most FAC's last two weeks or more. Why? It is difficult to build a consensus in four or five days. Teeninvestor (talk) 14:03, 23 December 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello?Teeninvestor (talk) 16:06, 26 December 2009 (UTC)


 * A message at the top of this page says that Sandy is traveling until January 1, and may take a long time to respond until then. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 16:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Please see Template:FAC-instructions, in particular: "The FA director, Raul654—or his delegates, SandyGeorgia and Karanacs—determines the timing of the process for each nomination." When objections are substantial, and there is plenty of work identified to reach featured status, it's not helpful to leave the nomination open longer; it can often be faster to address the issues and then bring the FAC back for a fresh start. Sandy Georgia (Talk) 22:10, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Railpage Australia
Think it's a sock FAC  YellowMonkey  ( bananabucket )  23:19, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Premature closure
You seem to be getting a lot of complaints about premature closure. Fortunately, help is on the way. Merry Christmas. :) MastCell Talk 04:12, 24 December 2009 (UTC)


 * And a Happy New Year to you ! I had a witty response for you many days and many bottles of champagne ago, but I lost it.  It could be early Alzheimer's, but I doubt it, since I had my brain neuropsych verified this time last year, so I plead too much bubbly stuff and chocolate!  As for "help on the way", you blasted pharm schills take all the fun out of everything with your blooming pills!  Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 22:06, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Hmm. Watch, once they start marketing this stuff for real, there will be TV ads, "talk to your doctor" prompts, PE support groups, and a bunch of ghostauthored review articles on the hidden psychological toll of untreated PE. Well, as Flight of the Conchords observed, two minutes in heaven is better than one minute in heaven. MastCell Talk 03:49, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't think that dude would know anything about heaven, but I'd bet they could sell him a pill anyway :) Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 04:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh Sandy, you just made my night with that link. Off to dig up that DVD right now! Risker (talk) 04:53, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
 * If you can't find the DVD, there's always the song :) Happy New Year; glad I made your night :) Sandy Georgia (Talk) 05:06, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas, Sandy!
I know you're not here, but have an exceptional holiday. The best ones are the ones you can't remember... May you wake up without a hangover in a bed strange to you. That's as far as I'm going with that on your talk page. Thanks for all the work you do at FAC! --Moni3 (talk) 13:40, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Same here Sandy. I don't have the bandwith or time to give you a proper, colorful 21st-century greeting, but hope that you have enjoyed your Christmas (holiday, if you wish) season. Cheers, Dabomb87Public (talk) 16:26, 26 December 2009 (UTC)

Holiday greetings
Best wishes from a secret admirer. Finetooth (talk) 05:05, 25 December 2009 (UTC)

Cerebellum
Hi -- I've pretty much completed my work on the article, though I may still do some tweaking. Once I got started, I ended up basically rewriting the whole thing from top to bottom. I'll leave it to you to decide what to do about that. Regards, Looie496 (talk) 15:19, 26 December 2009 (UTC)