User talk:Tarret/Archive 1

Welcome!'

Hello,, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers: I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~&#126;); this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you need help, check out Where to ask a question, ask me on my talk page, or place  on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions. Again, welcome!
 * The five pillars of Wikipedia
 * How to edit a page
 * Help pages
 * Tutorial
 * How to write a great article
 * Manual of Style

--Sebastian Kessel Talk 23:15, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Bounty Board
Greetings. You've recently been involved with working on get articles up to featured status, so I wanted to let you know about a new page, Bounty board. People have put up monetary bounties for certain articles reaching featured status - if the article makes it, the bounty lister donates the stated amount of money to the Wikimedia Foundation. So you can work on making articles featured, and donate other people's money at the same time. If this sounds interesting, I hope you stop by. – Quadell (talk) (bounties) 22:20, 27 October 2005 (UTC)

Edit summary
When editing an article on Wikipedia there is a small field labelled "Edit summary" under the main edit-box. It looks like this:


 * [[Image:Edit_Summary-2.png|Edit summary text box]]

The text written here will appear on the Recent changes page, in the page revision history, on the diff page, and in the watchlists of users who are watching that article. See m:Help:Edit summary for full information on this feature.

When you leave the edit summary blank, some of your edits could be mistaken for vandalism and may be reverted, so please always briefly summarize your edits, especially when you are making subtle but important changes, like changing dates or numbers. Thank you. Oleg Alexandrov (talk) 03:05, 7 November 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar
Thanks!!! :) Much appreciated!!

Sebastian Kessel Talk 00:10, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Barnstar #2
Tarret, thanks so much! It's nice to be appreciated! Although I have to admit that I have not been nearly as active as my colleagues; they have been the ones who deserve the main credit. I've been pitching in where I can, but it is they who have really been responsible for bringing all these medical articles to featured status. Still, I'll keep doing what I can! &mdash; Knowledge Seeker &#2470; 03:42, 27 January 2006 (UTC)

Community Portal colors
Do you have some suggestions for colors for Draft1a? Can you show me the colors you'd prefer, or provide links to them? --Go for it! 00:01, 4 April 2006 (UTC)

Open tasks template
Hi Tarret, I was delighted to see that good article open tasks template on your talk page! I wondered whether anyone would use it :) The biggest thing that was worrying me is it could get out of date quite quickly (well, I am sure the "sweeping" section won't, but some of the reviews and the nominations queue might!) My hope is that if a couple of people are using it, it won't be so hard to keep it up to date. It's pretty easy to edit, if you clear a task from it (or realise someone else has, or want to record the fact the queue is getting pretty long) you just need to click the "edit" button in the bottom right. Hope it's useful: enjoy! TheGrappler 02:31, 5 April 2006 (UTC)


 * Nice changes! I think the sweep list is now in a better place, and the automatic updating of the current collaboration is very nifty. Thanks! TheGrappler 22:43, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

GA
I see you went ahead and changed it! I'll take that as a sign of support then :) Would you mind making a statement to that effect at the Wikipedia talk:Good articles page, so it doesn't look like I did it unilaterally :p I'll change (but not deprecate) the other templates too, I think. TheGrappler 16:51, 9 April 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Tarret! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Prodego talk  17:03, 23 April 2006 (UTC)

Louis Freeh
Hello and thank you for reviewing my nom of Louis Freeh to good articlecy. I added reference templates and a notes section to the article; could you please take a look, and let me know if this satisfies the guidelines for references (and let me know of any other problems there are with the article?)

If you're interested in a heartwarming wikistory, I nominated the article because it was very, very poor originally, and I was just sick and tired of poor articles. Seeing it blossom into a "good article" would be very encouraging to me as an editor (my edits have, up to this point, been a mile wide but an inch deep.) Thanks again...Paul 07:21, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Awesome! Thanks! Paul 19:52, 11 June 2006 (UTC)

Monobook tool
Hi,

I am glad to see that you now have the 'dates' and 'units' tabs in the monobook tool. After you have tried out these tabs in a few articles, let me know what you think. There are quite people using them now. Regards bobblewik 11:53, 18 June 2006 (UTC)

Unreferenced Good Article Nominations
Hi there. I noticed you rejected a couple of my good article nominations for a lack of references. You ought to add them to WikiProject Unreferenced GA/Nominations if that's the only reason you rejected them. (Judging by how quickly you rejected them, I suspect you didn't look at much else.)

In fact, I'd prefer it if you could be a little more specific when you give your reasons in the future. Most of the Museum of the Portuguese Language page, I think, is common knowledge. In that article, the parts about the museum itself can be verified by the Museum website (either the rooms exist and contain what they contain, or they don't &mdash; not really a referencing or POV issue, I don't think.) What was said during the opening ceremony and the trivia section could be referenced, I guess... I'll try to get something for those parts.

My point I guess is that I feel you should take a slightly longer look at the article, expand on what needs referencing if possible, and perhaps include a link to the appropriate part of WP:CITE. People put a lot of work into these things. It also helps out idiots and explanation whores like me. Thanks! Grand master  ka  03:27, 20 June 2006 (UTC)

Eurovision Song Contest
Hello Tarret,

Thank you very much for reviewing this article. I'm wondering if you could please clarify some things, given your reasons for rejecting it as a Good Article:


 * What needs to be Wikified precisely? As far as I can see, the article follows the criteria very well. Is there something obvious which I have missed? Please tell me what is wrong; what guidelines are not adhered to. Then I will make the relevant changes.
 * You say it doesn't cite its sources. Well, I went through it before nominating it to see which statements are made within the article which could be questioned, and linked to external references for them. Could you please give me examples of what other things need citations? To be honest, I can't really see any. I know that not every single sentence in a WP article needs a citation to prove that there is no original research.. so surely most of what is written is acceptable, no? Well, obviously not, since you said so... and you have experience reviewing these things, I can see. So please let me know what things are wrong.

Also, can you clarify one other thing: The article is 37k long. I know that 30k is the recommended size limit. Does this in itself bar an article from being a Good and/or Featured Article? Is it acceptable to have Featured Articles which are over 30k, or do all articles 31k and over automatically get rejected?

Thanks a lot. EuroSong talk 00:45, 24 June 2006 (UTC)
 * Hi Tarret,
 * Thanks for your explanation. I have now re-formatted my source citations as per the WP:FN style. Please take a look and let me know if this is satisfactory. On my talk page, you said that the "Ties for first place" section was not Wikified. I can't see any problem with it. What precisely would you Wikify more about it? Thanks. EuroSong talk 02:00, 24 June 2006 (UTC)

(Bump.. to remind you :)

Remember to remove failed GA nominations
Just a friendly reminder, remember to remove failed/passed Good Article nominations from the list after reviewing them. I read through Lemon, was about to fail it for lack of references, and then found that you had already done it! I went ahead and removed Lemon from the list, so no worries, I just wanted to drop you a reminder. Phidauex 22:13, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

Minardi
I know the Minardi article doesn't have any references: You might have noticed the rather comprehensive assessment against the GA criteria on the talk page! The idea is to fix all the issues before getting it cleared for GA.

I put it on the list in the confident expectation that it takes a couple of weeks for items to be reviewed, so I could do the work while it worked its way up the list. I suppose this could be regarded as 'cheating', but it seemed logical to me.

Suppose it serves me right for trying to exploit the system! I guess it's a fair cop. Thanks for the interest, anyway (and for keeping me honest). 4u1e 19 July 2006

Archiving messages
Tarret,

I left you a warning message reminding you to archive stuff after I noticed that you had been removing things from your talk page. However, archiving does NOT mean moving stuff that looks bad first. Archiving a talk page means that you move the topics which are closed or oldest first, of which you have many. St.isaac 02:51, 25 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Additionally, your archive link is small and hard to see, so I've added an infobox which is more prominent. Feel free to remove it or replace it however, I'm just trying to help.  St.isaac

Image copyright problem with Image:Canadian_Peacekeeping_Medal.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Canadian_Peacekeeping_Medal.jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time in the next seven days. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * Image copyright tags

This is an automated notice by OrphanBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. 05:45, 25 August 2006 (UTC)

Wilderness first aid merge
Hello,

I noticed on October 16, 2005, you merged Wilderness first aid into the first aid article. I also noticed that from the discussion page, there wasn't consensus on the merge (in fact, there were no in favor oppinion). One year later, it was apparent to me that the section did not belong in first aid, so after reaching consensus, I resplit the article. Please do not merge articles when dissent outnumbers assent. St.isaac 22:29, 8 August 2006 (UTC)

Image uploads
Hi Tarret. Would you mind going through your image upload log? Most of your images do not include information about their source and copyright holder. Also, several of them are tagged NoRightsReserved or CopyrightedFreeUse; for these, could you also verify that the copyright holder has indeed released all rights to the image, including those for derivative works and commercial use. When this is the case, it would be very helpful if you explained the reasons on the image description page. I have removed an incorrect tag from one of these images, Image:Canadian Peacekeeping Medal.jpg, but many others need review. If you need any help, please do not hesitate to post a question at Media copyright questions, or to reply to me here. Thanks ×Meegs 04:09, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify
Thanks for signing up for our project! Let me know if you have any questions. -- Merope 04:43, 9 September 2006 (UTC)

Heli Attack 3
Hi Tarret,

Having waited three weeks for the results of the GA nomination for Heli Attack 3 I'd appreciate it if you could make some more specific suggestions on how to raise the standards of the article. For example, the article used to have a History section - see this old version of the article. During the peer review it was suggested that this was moved to a separate article and I duly obliged, starting Heli Attack (series). Should this be brought back or should a new section be written and, if so, what should it include?

Also, how should I go about making it come from less of a gamer's perspective? I can see your point, but how much should be rewritten or removed without compromising the quality of the article? Again, any comments and suggestions on this would be richly appreciated.

Thanks for reviewing the article, now please make it possible for myself and other edito... actually, it's just me ;-) to raise the bar and make this a GA.

Regards, Countdown Crispy  (  ? 11:19, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Second look at an AfD?
There was a typo in the article name at Articles for deletion/H. N. Nage Gowda. Maybe a candidate for speedy keep? --Mereda 20:01, 13 September 2006 (UTC)

Go raibh maith agat!
Hi there, Tarret!

Thank you so much for supporting my RfA ! It ended up passing and I'm rather humbled by the support (and a bit surprised that it was snowballed a day early! ). Please let me know if I can help you out and I welcome any comments, questions, or advice you wish to share.

Sláinte! hoopydink  Conas tá t ú?  04:34, 15 September 2006 (UTC) ==

See
The talk page on harley Earl for some updates on history. randazzo56 00:19, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

Welcomer's Barnstar!


I, Deon, award you the Welcomer's Barnstar for welcoming me to Wikipedia and showing me all the works! =D --Deon 12:07, 16 September 2006 (UTC)

September Esperanza Newsletter
For your reading pleasure, the newest Esperanza newsletter can be found at Esperanza/Newsletter. &mdash;Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, Freakofnurture, and Titoxd 04:04, 18 September 2006 (UTC)

GA of Six-Day War
I don't think your motivation for failing the article was adequate considering that it is very well-cited with the exception of a few sections. If anything, I'd say over-referenced to some degree. Motivating one self by simply saying "not enough inlines" usually isn't constructive criticism and in this case it's especially difficult to interpret since the article is by and large well-cited. I'm hoping you could provide a more detailed review.

Peter Isotalo 10:07, 1 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the response, but I'm not really involved in the article myself. I just followed the link from the nomination page and felt like the review was somewhat unfair. I completely agee with your comments about the lead, though.
 * Peter Isotalo 11:58, 3 October 2006 (UTC)

Do not delete content from your talk page
This is your final warning. Do not remove legitimate messages and warnings from your talk page. Do not hide your deletions with false edit summaries. If you continue to remove warnings and messages from your talk page, you will lose your privilege of editing your talk page. --St.isaac 04:57, 12 October 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Pluto as this week's WP:AID winner
Davodd 20:13, 16 October 2006 (UTC)

On WerdnaBot
The Werdnabot page makes it sound it its for user talk pages, are you sure it should be used on the GA talk page like that? Homestarmy 01:37, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Diamond cut
How can it not be a GA and be a Featured topic. That I don't understand??? Lincher 00:52, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

Crystallographic defects in diamond
Crystallographic defects in diamond article contains a lot of references of Harvard style. Is it not enough? wikipedia articles are not scientific: it is not necessary to link at every statement. --Stepanovas 07:53, 24 October 2006 (UTC)

VandalSniper
Thanks for applying to use VandalSniper! You have been approved. If have not already done so, you may find instructions to install VS on the project page.

As some of the libraries VandalSniper runs on are currently in transition, there have been a few issues reported with setup. At the moment, Linux is the most compatible platform for VS. If you have questions or problems, you may find help on the project page or its talk page. Please also feel free to contact me for help and I will do my best to assist you.

Thanks for becoming a part of one of Wikipedia's best new software tools! -- Omicronpersei8 (talk) 04:19, 27 October 2006 (UTC)

You helped choose Coffee as this week's WP:AID winner
– ClockworkSoul 04:06, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

Image:B balkissoon.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:B balkissoon.jpg. I notice the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:
 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that any fair use images which are replaceable by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. – Quadell (talk) (random) 18:03, 1 November 2006 (UTC)
 * You may be interested to know that an RFC has recently been initiated regarding Fair use images of Canadian politicians. Many images of Canadian public figures are about to be deleted, including ones you have uploaded. Please feel free to participate. - Mcasey666 05:46, 2 November 2006 (UTC)

November Esperanza Newsletter
For your reading pleasure, the newest Esperanza newsletter (November '06 edition) can be found at Esperanza/Newsletter. &mdash;Natalya, Banes, Celestianpower, EWS23, FireFox, The Halo, Shreshth91 and HighwayCello, 20:33, 1 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof! 1.3
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Tarret! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page and please note this is VP 1.3 not 1.2.2 see this for the approved list. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 17:02, 13 November 2006 (UTC)

Cox's Sandpiper
Hi. Could you expand on your reasons for failing this article's GA nomination? I'd like to fix the problem but your reply doesn't really give me much to go on. Thanks SP-KP 22:38, 18 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply. 2 & 3 should be easy to fix. 4 will be difficult as ther aren't any free-license pictures of this taxon available, to my knowledge, due to its rarity. I'm confused by comments 1, though - there are some inline citations in the article, using Harvard referencing. Are you saying that this is the wrong sort of referencing system to us, or are you saying that not enough of the statements in the article have their sources shown. Thanks SP-KP 10:43, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Image:Sparkssmall.jpg
Hey, could you take a look at Image:Sparkssmall.jpg? A user requested that it be cleaned up, so I fixed the tilt on the image, but OrphanBot wants more info on it's copyright. Could you provide some please? Thanks! --Brad Beattie (talk) 04:37, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

Welcome to VandalProof!
Thank you for your interest in VandalProof, Tarret! You have now been added to the list of authorized users, so if you haven't already, simply download and install VandalProof from our main page. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or any other moderator, or you can post a message on the discussion page. Betacommand (talk • contribs • Bot) 19:31, 20 November 2006 (UTC)

GA references
Thanks for your reply. So just to clarify then, you are happy with the number of references, but you just need me to convert each of them into ref/footnote format, and then the article is GA-ready, is that correct? SP-KP 17:42, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

Hi. I think all the refs are now fixed. Could you take a look and let me know if you agree? Thanks SP-KP 22:38, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply. I've renominated it, as you suggested. SP-KP 23:04, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

Err, the rule change...
Well, the delisting rules just got done changing, and you delisted the Latin Alphabet article immedietly instead of giving it time. I won't reverse it because i'm no great fan of this delay myself, but this is just a heads up is all, the news rules are on the Review page. Homestarmy 02:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know, but still, there's a vaugly defined delay in delisting that apparently delisters have to follow. I say "vaugly" because i'm inclined to interpret it as about 2 hours.... :D Homestarmy 02:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering...
Do you think you could give your opinion on the Agrippina opera article GA review? I think some people are starting to get angry at each other but there's only about four or five of us really getting into the discussion, and this has just been such a weird and messy review overall, I was wondering if you could maybe say something :/. Homestarmy 22:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

Err, the rule change...
Well, the delisting rules just got done changing, and you delisted the Latin Alphabet article immedietly instead of giving it time. I won't reverse it because i'm no great fan of this delay myself, but this is just a heads up is all, the news rules are on the Review page. Homestarmy 02:07, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
 * I know, but still, there's a vaugly defined delay in delisting that apparently delisters have to follow. I say "vaugly" because i'm inclined to interpret it as about 2 hours.... :D Homestarmy 02:16, 24 November 2006 (UTC)

I was wondering...
Do you think you could give your opinion on the Agrippina opera article GA review? I think some people are starting to get angry at each other but there's only about four or five of us really getting into the discussion, and this has just been such a weird and messy review overall, I was wondering if you could maybe say something :/. Homestarmy 22:08, 25 November 2006 (UTC)

GA review of Mitosis
Thank you for the thorough review, I think all your points have now been addressed. TimVickers 21:02, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

NY 52 GA nom
I had told TwinsMetsFan (the nominator) that it would probably fail because of the lack of citations (although given that much of the article's text is a route description, which is sort of difficult to cite to begin with), so I wasn't surprised by your verdict. But which of the bulleted lists should be turned into prose. The communities list? That's pretty much a standard on all in-state roads pages (see the project guidelines). Or the history section, which would make more sense? Daniel Case 03:06, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

GA Žirmūnai
Hello. Your raised problems possibly were fixed. Please, could you take a look now and state your opinion? Cheers, M.K. 17:26, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Glacier Mass Balance
Tarret: You left a comment about the Glacier Mass Balance not being up to GA status. I do not disagree necessarily but I am curious about the reasoning. "Excessive bulleted lists", but other than references which are not bulleted there is none. Secondly bias to N Hem. Well it just so happens as map shows that glacier mass balance just is not measured hardly at all in SHem. And the only long term program NZ is discussed. So that issue cannot be rectified.Peltoms

Non-free use disputed for Image:Sddlcorp.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Sddlcorp.gif. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:30, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Maroon logo.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:Maroon logo.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read carefully the instructions at Non-free content and then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies. Using one of the templates at Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 04:56, 6 June 2007 (UTC)