User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 31

byron
FWIW, I think although the podium image is the better and more interesting picture, the mugshot is better suited to the key "this is the guy" portrait jimfbleak (talk) 07:21, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * No, (have I said something that could be be misinterpreted?) - all I meant is that the lead image, IMHO, should establish what he looks like, and any action shots should follow later. I know it's not quite the same, but in my bird FAs, the lead image is usually just the bird, with images of feeding, flying etc later jimfbleak (talk) 07:30, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I agree entirely with Jim; a simple headshot is better for the infobox image, and action shots are preferable for elsewhere in the article. Sarcasticidealist (talk) 15:46, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, January 31, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 22:14, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

William D. Boyce FAC
I addressed your concerns here. Didn't understand one of them.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 22:23, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

NowCommons: File:20071108 Canon Powershot TX1 cellphone picture (replaceable).jpg
File:20071108 Canon Powershot TX1 cellphone picture (replaceable).jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:20071108 Canon Powershot TX1.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case:. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. --Erwin85Bot (talk) 23:06, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: League season infobox
Not really sure; haven't used that one before. But thanks for reminding me about the season standings box. I'd been creating custom ones for football standings. JKBrooks85 (talk) 01:17, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Reply
Yes, that info should be added. Otherwise, then the article would seem stub like. Also sorry for the belated reply. --The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 06:11, 3 February 2009 (UTC) I have a question about the Talk:Schulze Baking Company Plant/GA1. I hope you realize this is the first article I have reviewed, and so I am not sure what to add to create that page, and if you can help me. The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 00:58, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
 * About step four, with am I to add to the page? The New Mikemoraltalkcontribs 01:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Saxbe fix
Tony, Sandy had a reason for removing your nomination. The backlog at FAC has been terrible lately, and unofficially, the limit is one FAC per nominator. I strongly advise you to stick to it for the time being. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:32, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

File:20080602 Joffrey Tower.JPG
Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons. The image had been tagged with the Copy to Wikimedia Commons template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:File:20080602 Joffrey Tower.JPG. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 14:43, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

File:20080920 Cubs Win Flag at Ohio St. Beach.JPG
Just to let you know that I recently copied the above image that you uploaded to Wikipedia over to WikiMedia Commons. The image had been tagged with the Copy to Wikimedia Commons template. Your image is now available to all Wikimedia projects at the following location: Commons:File:20080920 Cubs Win Flag at Ohio St. Beach.JPG. The original version of the image uploaded to Wikipedia has been tagged with WP:CSD. Cheers! --Captain-tucker (talk) 15:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

William Henry Harrison
Any help copyedting this for FAC prep would be greatly appreciated.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 21:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Your conduct in and around FAC
Tony, I am trying my best to ignore your conduct but I cannot abide by your frequent comments to the effect that there is some "army" or cabal of FAC reviewers controlled by Sandy that is deliberately derailing your nominations. Your baseless accusations are personal attacks on good faith contributors to this project. Sandy is a hard-working editor dedicated to the success of this project, and so are the FAC reviewers. Neither deserve your vitriol. For that matter, I also consider you a hard-working and dedicated editor, but your conduct is unbecoming and makes going near any of your articles an extreme displeasure.

Unless you have a diff showing some evidence of collusion, I request that you go through your remarks at FAC, Sandy's talk page, and other places, and strike your inappropriate comments. -- Laser brain  (talk)  04:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have the Talk pages of many FAC participants watchlisted. If I notice a discussion about an article that needs attention, I will go review it. If, as in the case of your article, I notice that the article has gained support despite being substandard, you can bet that I'm going to go out of my way to point out why it shouldn't be promoted. That doesn't mean anyone asked me to or requested that I do so. In my entire history of reviewing FACs, and I have reviewed many, I have never been compelled by anyone to review a particular article and I definitely have never been asked to oppose or support on any grounds other than my own judgment.


 * I often arrive "late" at FACs because of the huge backlog, and often I have to oppose over a number of supports. Many times I am the first person to seriously examine the prose. So, I often get accused of ruining/spoiling/derailing people's nominations; it's all in a day's work for me. But, I don't expect you to understand because you don't actually review any articles. That part of your conduct doesn't bother me, but your personal attacks do. I wasn't asking for an apology, I was asking that you strike your inappropriate remarks. If you continue, my next step will be a user conduct RfC so other reviewers don't have to suffer this behavior to pass. -- Laser brain  (talk)  04:40, 6 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Both. I also note with humor that you are contacting people who have supported your FACs in the past asking for reviews, but not people who have opposed you. This constitutes partisan canvassing per WP:CANVASS. -- Laser brain  (talk)  04:58, 6 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Incidently, Tony, I am not convinced you are wrong on the general (pun intended) point, only so far as it involves me! There was a very suspicious oppose during my RfA.  And it is something I have heard from at least one editor I greatly respect.  But suspicion is not enough, and we all have to AGF.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:01, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

hope you didn't miss...
hope you didn't miss this Ling.Nut (talk&mdash;WP:3IAR) 05:35, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

GA noms question
Hey Tony. My name's Hunter. I recently joined WikiProject Barack Obama and I saw you had a GA nom out there for Inauguration of Barack Obama. I'm still fairly new at all this and I've never done a GA review before, but I'd love to give it a try with this one. I was wondering if perhaps if I reviewed that one, maybe you wouldn't mind reviewing one of my two Obama-related GA noms, 2008 Barack Obama assassination scare in Denver or Chris Lu? (The assassination scare one has been out there longer so I'd rather see that one get reviewed; unless you want to read both, since yours is longer than mine! lol)

I'm not sure if you're part of WikiProject Barack Obama or not, but I checked in here and it seems its not a problem for people in the same project to review each other's stuff, as long as there is no quid pro quo reviewing (no "I'll pass your article if you pass mine" attitudes). Let me know what you think either way. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 22:43, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

FAC
Hi Tony, I think the Byron Brown debate has moved into aspects of reviewing outside my expertise, so I'm not sure I can help. However it has been a pleasure working with you and I look forward to the next article of yours that I find at FAC.  Were Spiel  Chequers  00:07, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

SI Swimsuit edition template
Sure. If you can find a way to make them passable and people in DRV thinks it's worth an overturn, go for it. :) --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 04:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoops. Sorry. Yep I misunderstood the request. I'll put them in your userspace. The address of the first one is User:TonyTheTiger/Template:1984SISwimsuit. They all have that basic form. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 08:06, 9 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK doke. This is one of those cases where I don't have a real strong opinion on the matter, so I probably won't comment. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 05:24, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Suggestion. Try bundling more content together in each and covering multiple years all the 1980s or 1980-1985. Whatever might bring down the overall number of templates and still be somewhat meaningful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.139.30.214 (talk) 18:02, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I replied at my talk page to keep the discussion in one place. Cheers, –Black Falcon (Talk) 21:01, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Withdrawal
I'm a cranky bastard, not a POV-pusher – though I admit in the heat of battle, it may be easy to mistake one for the other. Good luck with your nom. Ling.Nut (talk&mdash;WP:3IAR) 04:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Saxbe fix
Sorry for delayed answer I was busy. I will try to do something about it next week. Ruslik (talk) 17:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm just not going to have very much time to work on this article, given that I leave for Australia on Tuesday. I'll try to give it a once over, though.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

FYI, the 1873 increase and subsequent repeal of the increase for Cabinet officers is covered in the stub article Salary Grab Act. It has nothing to do with a Saxbe fix.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:27, 15 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I'd say give it a shot and see where it lands, unless you plan major work on the article. It's a lot better than it was.  The legal errors are gone, the prose is improved, and it seems more than just a list of fixes.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:09, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 23:15, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration GA
Thanks Tony. I'm actually at work right now, but I'll try to take a look at the GAC tonight. If I can't, tomorrow at the latest. And you're welcome for the tiger. That's awesome, I might steal something like that for my talk page (with some other picture, that is, not tigers. lol) --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:54, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, there is still one more pending suggestion. Other than that, it looks good to go. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 23:56, 10 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for letting me know about the ArticleHistory thing. I was not aware of it. --Hunter Kahn (talk) 04:35, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I just added 5 more medals
I just added 5 more medals, per WP:ARSFAME and your comments on WT:ARS.

Since you have so much stuff on your talk page, I would strongly suggest adding a talk page button on the top of your page (you can include it in your awards header):

Coding:

or

 [ Click here to leave me a message]

Coding:

 [ Click here to leave me a message]

Ikip (talk) 12:38, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Gail O'Neill
Hi. I've nominated Gail O'Neill, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Did you know. You can see the hook for the article here, where you can improve it if you see fit. –Black Falcon (Talk) 08:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I saw the orange "New message" bar just after I posted this notice. Heh. :)
 * I thought the bit about refusing ads on principle was interesting, but please replace the hook if you can think of a better one. Cheers, –Black Falcon (Talk) 08:39, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Byron Brown
I see that Byron Brown FAC has been archived - pity. I am willing to continue copyediting and suggesting possible improvements, if you wish, to help the article pass next time. Let me know. Brianboulton (talk) 15:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: TFD formatting assistance
What specifically do you need help with, Tony? I'm not clear from your note. --User:Woohookitty Diamming fool! 05:42, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Jon Burge image
If you want to use a fair use of a living person, you can just look him up on google images can't you.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:06, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * When someone is improving an article for GA, A-class, or FA consideration, I try to leave creative control of the article to them, except for helping out with some grammar or copyediting. That's why I didn't do it myself.  I was preparing to participate in the A-class review for the Burge article and looked over the article first.  If you don't want to use a fair use image of the subject of a BLP, or believe someone will object if you try, that's fine.  Cla68 (talk) 07:28, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I understand very much that a picture would be useful. However, unless we can show him on the cover of something in a way that is relevant to the article, I don't think a fair use image is appropriate.  There are in fact images very high in the search results on the cover of the Chicago Sun-Times.  However, I do not see the newspaper article as significant to his biography.  Thus, I am staying away from fair use.  I apologize if I did not explain myself previously.  I am going to copy this to his talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:35, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Washington Park Subdivision
Hi! I just wanted to let you know that I've put Washington Park Subdivision's GA review on hold for improvements. You can find details on what I think needs improvement at Talk:Washington Park Subdivision/GA1. If you have any questions about the review or have resolved the problems, just post on the review page and I'll see it. -Drilnoth (talk) 02:53, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

At long last map
Hi Tony, I have not forgotten, although it took way longer than I thought it would. Here's the Millennium Park map. When you like it, I will upload it to Commons and delete it here. My thought is to put the labels on as wikilinked names, so clicking on them will take you to the article. Probably needs to be at least 400 pixels wide (what it is here). I can tweak it - please let me know what you think (off to bed now, thoiugh). Hope you like it, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:40, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much for the barnstar. I based the map on aerial photos and included the Nichols Bridgeway based on File:Lurie garden and bridgeway.JPG. I guessed on width but it seems pretty narrow. I will let you know when the map is linked. The label orientation might make it easier to keep the map oriented as is. I will upload the rotated version and try adding a few of the same labels to each so you can decide wehich is better. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:42, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for checking on the bridgeway location. I did find an omission (missing bit of sidewalk) and have added that. If you want to see an example of linked labels, see the battle names in Black Hawk War Map. Am working on the labeled map now - it will be a template, so easy to add to whatever articles you want. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:48, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am honestly not sure if you could putthe temnplate in the infobox / navbox or not. My guess is no, but I would have to try it. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 17:18, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, it is not done, but what do you think of this to start? (I will be away from my computer for about an hour). Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 17:34, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad you like it - do want me to work on a vertical (north up) version too? I am also thinking of making the dark grey shade a bit lighter, so I could label the Harris Theater and Pritzker Pavilion right on the building (too dark to see the letters well now). I will also try to smooth the bridge out a bit - what a pain to draw that. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 20:55, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Do you want the streets labeled? Michigan and Columbus are easy, the vertical ones will be hard as links (could just write the names on). Is it clear which is Harris Theater and which is the Pritzker Pavilion? Do I need to lighten the greys? I have already made the vertical map (just rotated this one and changed the North arrow label). I can try to put a few labels on - if it looks too goofy, I'll stop. Have to run some errands. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:17, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I added the street names - will make a start on the vertical version over the weekend. I can take a look at BP Pedestrian Bridge but Dincher and I are working on a state park first and I also have promised Dtbohrer to help with Kinzua Bridge, so it'll be third in line. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I tried it in Internet Explorer and had the problem, then purged the page and it stayed no matter what (I have the purge app selected in my preferences - click on the clock). I am not sure what else to do. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:38, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I have been pretty busy IRL - sorry not to get back to you sooner. Would it make any sense to put the map at the bottom of the Millennium park articles? I note that most of them already have the Geographic Location template. Would it be possible to put the map and that side by side? Is that template needed with the map (do they duplicate each other too much to have both)? If only one is needed, the map could be in the same spot at the bottom of each article (but centered). If you think it would be useful to have / try a vertical version of the map, I can work on that too. The only other idea I had was to put the map in a collapsing window, so the person could click to open and veiw it, but that seems like it owuld defeat the purpose of the map to some extent. Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:25, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Nomination
I am on the verge of nominating you for administrator, Is this something you would like to do??? South Bay (talk) 10:12, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Monk
Hi Tony, there are some things left that I should do before the Adrian Monk article can pass it's GA review, however, I'm taking a 3-day wikibreak tomorrow, so I won't be able to edit the article a few days. If you think it's too long, feel free to fail the article (I'll re-nominate it later), if not, I will be back in three days or so. Just thought you should know.-- Music 26/  11  17:23, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy 's Day!
For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.<span style="font-family:Verdana,sans-serif"> — <b style="color:#060;">Rlevse</b> • Talk  • 00:07, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Ernie Vick and Bennie Oosterbaan
Thanks for the nice note about the Ernie Vick article. And good work in getting Bennie Oosterbaan promoted up to GA status -- if any athlete deserved a better article it was him. I'm back into the UM athletics mode, having created or expanded articles recently on some of the great names in Michigan athletics, including Keene Fitzpatrick, Mike Murphy (trainer and coach), Charles A. Baird, Neil Snow, Boss Weeks, Eddie Tolan, Sam Stoller, Stephen Farrell (track and field), Charles B. Hoyt, Philip Bartelme, William Watson (track and field athlete), Bob Osgood, Harold Nichols, Edward I. Schalon, Robert H. Hume, H. Ross Hume, Francis Heydt, Ken Doherty (track), Carol Hutchins, Bev Plocki, Beth Wymer, William Murphy (tennis), Elton Wieman, Art Walker, Ernest Allmendinger, Cedric C. Smith, Angus Goetz, Dave Porter, Dominic Tomasi, Albert E. Herrnstein, Bo Molenda, Wally Grant, Wally Gacek, Gordon McMillan, Mel Wakabayashi, Gordon Wilkie, Bill MacFarland (ice hockey), Dave Debol, Mindy Gehrs, and Franklin Cappon. As far as trying to get any of them promoted to GA status, I'm trying to keep my focus on creating new content. I've got Fritz Crisler and Willie Heston in mind for significant improvements as well, but they are such big subjects that I've been putting it off. If you think any of them are worth trying to promote, I'd welcome any assistance you may care to offer. Hope all is well with you. Cbl62 (talk) 01:14, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you!
Just a quick note to say thank you for the barnstar - it is much appreciated. You do great work - keep it up! Dana boomer (talk) 02:17, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Again ...

 * Congratulations! That's a VERY impressive amount of contributing!  Royal broil  01:02, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My congratulations too (and on your day on the 15th) Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 16:16, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 16, 2009
<div style="margin-left:30px; margin-right:30px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; font-size:135%; line-height:120%;">

<div style="margin-left:20px; margin-right:20px; text-align:center; color:#333; margin-bottom:-20px; font-size:90%; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif; padding-bottom:5px; font-style:italic;">You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 07:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Your message on my page
Thank you for your message on my page. I've replied here. Hope it helps, regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:24, 17 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your message on my page. I've replied here Hope it helps, regards, Anameofmyveryown (talk) 03:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama
Hi Tiger:

Thanks for the note and the badge on my talk page about this article. Articles about current events really need quick attention. Otherwise they can become "no longer current" without ever having been carefully edited. Wanderer57 (talk) 08:03, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello! there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath and respond there as soon as possible.

Chris Lu
I saw you started the GAN review for Chris Lu. Thanks for doing that, I very much appreciate it! I responded to the lead suggestions and will continue responding as you make comments. Looking forward to improving the article with your help! --Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Gail O'Neill
--Dravecky (talk) 09:20, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Millennium Park template
Wow, that is a VERY nice template. I had no idea that you and Ruhrfisch were putting this thing together. It is a great idea and greatly improves a lot of the Millennium Park articles. Nice work! --TorsodogTalk 15:19, 18 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it is a bit redundant. If this were the article about the actual park, I would agree with you, but as an article about the Bean, I don't think the image reall adds anything that the map doesn't. Also, if we ever plan to take this article to FAC again, I could see more non-free image problems. I think minimizing unnecessary images in the article is a good idea. --TorsodogTalk 19:02, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Personally, I don't, but I know that was brought up during one of the previous FACs. And now with a free alternative in the template, I could see it being brough up again. --TorsodogTalk 19:44, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Userbox for GA reviews
The userbox User Good Articles reviewed has been updated so that it can now link to a page in your user subspace where you keep track of all your GA reviews, if you have such a page. This can be done by adding a | and then the name of your user subpage (or subsection of your regular user page) wherever you have the template called. For example, on my user page I am using ""which displays as There is more information on how to do this at Template:User Good Articles reviewed.

Note: If you are not interested in doing this, you don't have to do anything; the template will still work for you exactly as it does now.

Best, r ʨ  ana ɢ  talk/contribs 17:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Your user page
Sorry, I seem to have accidentally reverted you. I've now reverted my reversion.  Ty  20:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, thanks. Have a took at Talk:Stella_Vine if you get time! By the way, your user and talk pages look very odd on a low res screen 800 x 600. The symbols at the top go off to the left and the image gallery extends off to the right.  Ty  02:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Model navboxes
I still am not really convinced of the need for navboxes, but don't oppose them so much I want to make a fuss about it... If you're making navboxes the top four fashion magazines really are US Vogue, Vogue Italia, Vogue Paris, and British Vogue (though that one probably just sneaks under the wire). Maybe a runner-up is Elle but it doesn't really have the reputation of being high fashion material. More commercial, maybe like British Vogue is more commercial. Mademoiselle, Glamour, and Cosmo are really "women's" magazines rather than fashion magazines. Those definitely shouldn't have navboxes. Any other Vogues you see probably aren't worth navboxing. The Spanish Vogue is particularly lame, in my mind--for their January issue, they reused content that had been in American vogue in September if I remember correctly! The Vogue article says there are 19 different Vogues, which sounds about right.

The problem with the navboxes as I see them is that covers are one very limited metric of models' success. Just as important are campaigns, fashion shows (bonus points if you "open" or "close", or if you're new and you're an exclusive), and editorials (in US vogue models are never on the cover, but being in one of the editorials is a big deal-- oh and fyi "editorial" refers not to text but the photo shoot pages toward the end). And there's no way the editors of the Michelle Obama article are going to let you stick a Vogue navbox there! I'd limit these to the model pages. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:00, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Just added one last comment at WT:FASHION. If you need help identifying any cover models let me know. (I can do recent ones at least, not so much for a long time ago.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:36, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * What's the URL for the cover archvie? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * well, that one's Gemma Ward (which I found by googling) but she looks very unlike herself there! Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:53, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've finished your most recent British Vogue infobox. Here's an article you might want to read about the rise of celebrities as cover models for fashion magazines. Another resource you may find helpful for figuring out cover models is thefashionspot.com, a forum of obsessive fashionistas that document basically everything that happens in any fashion magazine of any importance. (Along with full-color scans of pretty much everything... it's amazing they haven't been shut down yet!) Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:10, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Maybe I'll give that a go later... That's more or less before my time (i'm young, and fashion is fickle). I suppose i can look at it as a test of my google-fu. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * How about this to minimize template clutter? That way everything for one decade is in one navbox. Models will basically have two navboxes max, unless they're ridiculous icons that get covers for decades. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:39, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Like I said, thefashionspot.com. Just browse/search the threads. Here's their vogue italia cover thread for example (very useful). I'm currently using it to fill up the navbox in my sandbox. Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Ed Schock
Shubinator (talk) 17:30, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Saxbe fix
I think the article is looking good, but I am troubled by a faint sense that you are taking a position on the issue, rather than being neutral. I don't think using Pete Williams, a journalist, as support for a point of view gives that view substance. He is not a reliable source for constitutional law. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 23:13, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

another Saxbe fix question
Another question. This article sounds like there is no controversy over the Saxbe fix, but this article that you reference makes it sound like there might be some opposition under the right conditions: Have you seriously considered opposition? I am almost to supporting the article, but ... it really does undermine the constitutional intention. Is "Intentionalist" a real word? Also, "a view believes" - a view doesn't believe. And I don't think, as an article writer, you should take a position on how the constitution should be interpreted. The "Legality" section is a little hard to understand. What is meant by "the class of person has not been an issue"? &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 00:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * It seems to me, that since the Saxbe fix is currently being litigaged, that its constitutionality is being questioned. And Robert Yates (above) believes that the "term" should begin with the original date of the first term, so how can you say that it is commonly accepted? It may be generally accepted because, until recently, it has not been seriously challenged. But if the Supreme Court has never ruled on it, how can it be considered settled? It may be considered a forgone conclusion by most, but it is not settled. And you say that "Solis's confirmation process was delayed, and no fix for Solis has yet been made." Why not, and why was it delayed? &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 01:55, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, it was O'Connor, John F. (1995) who said that. (Your talk page takes forever to load!) &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 02:07, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

10 vs 20
I really doubt this will be that much of a problem, but if it is, I think the better solution would be some sort of expandable holder customized for each person that has too many navboxes. Even as it is, each navbox already contains a huge amount of names. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:25, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't think these navboxes should go on anyone who wasn't a model (for an actress this is really no different than getting on the cover of Time or whatever), so I don't think we will have to worry about Susan Sarandon/Helen Mirren. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I've been putting dec/jan last. Thefashionspot has been my main source, because they make a lot of straight lists by year (at least for recent years, probably not for decades ago). Sometimes just google. Flickr could be helpful, but before the 2000s I barely recognize any models. (Except the first-name icons from the 90s, I guess.) Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:38, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Wow, that's a lot! And many are labeled, which is the best part! Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:43, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Those were alternate covers for the same issue. See here. I'm not sure re foldover covers. There was one for sure somewhere in the template, and I just put them all on like normal. Don't remember off the top of my head which issue it was. I'm not sure if I'll get around to more of this today... I've been busy making some articles about human trafficking (and in the process being accused of being a conspiracy-theory activist) and doing some translations from Spanish. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:41, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Appears to be a gag. Don't remember that cover (and probably would considering it's in English) and check out the photostream. Someone is really into barbies... Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:48, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Smile!
<div style="border-style:solid; border-color:blue; background-color:AliceBlue; border-width:1px; text-align:left; padding:8px;" class="plainlinks">

A NobodyMy talk has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend, Go on smile! Cheers, and Happy editing! Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Re:FL/AC
I can [and did] support your FLC but I can't support your FAC because I only checked for reference formatting and I can't make a decision for promoting an FAC based on that, sorry. But best of wishes on both of your nominations. :)-- TRU  CO   22:52, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

GAN of Keith Bostic (American football)
I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:24, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Saxbe fix images
TonyTheTiger, I can upload the cropped picture of Saxbe, but it will only be an hour or so later (since I am not at the appropriate PC now). If you wish to go ahead and upload your own, try the "Upload file -> It is a derivative work of a file from Commons" option from the Commons toolbox. Jappalang (talk) 02:58, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Sorry, TonyTheTiger, nowadays I am just reviewing the images (just like Ealdgyth usually reviews sources). On certain articles, I vote because of an intense interest in the subject (such as Richard Neville, 16th Earl of Warwick).  As for definite public domain pictures of Edward Oliver Walcott, I have uploaded File:Edward Oliver Wolcott 2.jpg and File:Edward Oliver Wolcott 2.jpg that you can use.  Jappalang (talk) 01:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama
Thank you for carrying the article from beginning to end. Especially all the finishing details to bring it to GA status. I think it will be a good featured article...but maybe after more vetting and perhaps at the one-year anniversary. Aaron charles (talk) 03:18, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * No major problems. I never could square away some of those D.C. funding estimates to final numbers. Aaron charles (talk) 05:01, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * Sure, can co-nom. Have never done before, so advise when ready. Aaron charles (talk) 15:35, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Request
Tony,

Congratulations on your article rescue successes. Could I beg you to please specify the kind of deletion when announcing them? Your excellent work is often seriously misrepresented as solely involving articles that were deleted at AfD for failing the notability guideline. WhatamIdoing (talk) 19:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)


 * I had announcements like this one in mind, but I'm not picky. WhatamIdoing (talk) 02:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Jack Kemp
You can try searching on Flickr to see if anyone has captured him in a conference or personal photo. If the uploader has licensed it as under CC-2.0 or CC-SA-2.0 (see WP:FLICKR), you can safely upload that picture (perform a general check first that the uploader did not "pirate" the picture from some other site). If you found a picture but the uploader has not licensed it as above, you might try contacting them and persuade them to release the pictures under those licenses. Other than that, the only other ways would be to scour the official federal government sites that clearly state the images are in public domain, or write in to Jack Kemp's party to release a picture under OTRS. Jappalang (talk) 02:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Senator appointment by President Warren G. Harding as circuit judge - Saxbe fix
I thought the article said that the Ineligibility Clause did not apply to the judiciary anyway. I can't find that now in the article. I though the article said that several legislators had moved to the judiciary during Washington's time. Was that found to be wrong and taken out? (Or is my memory shot?) &mdash; Mattisse  (Talk) 02:55, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

If it wins
You better go straight to Raul's talk page, he just scheduled thru Mar 6!--Wehwalt (talk) 05:56, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I saw the exchange between you and Raul and am somewhat amused that after all that, you won't get the point record because you'll have to go to Raul's talk page, not TFA/R! Man proposes, ...--Wehwalt (talk) 06:20, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Odd, non-Wiki related ?
Hey Tony,

An odd question here. What's the best street in Chicago, or the best streets? All things considered, restaurants, attractions, architecture, etc. What do you think? What do your friends think? ( This is actually some nonsensical attempt by me to impress a an ex-girlfriend (dont ask), so any help would be appreciated ), don't worry I laugh at myself even as you laugh at me. :-) --IvoShandor (talk) 17:17, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
 * But those are cliche, they are Chicago for all the wrong reasons. What about, the real Chicago. Where you go if you don't just read their websites and tourist brochures. --IvoShandor (talk) 18:15, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Evans Cheruiyot
--Dravecky (talk) 18:57, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Rainbow/PUSH Initiative
I added the 1% Student Loans to the list of initiatives. I do not see how that can be misconstrued as vandalism. Several Internet sites have carried Reverend Jackson's statements about his one percent interest rate for student loan borrowers. I added it to the list several days after he had introduced it on his radio program and had presented it at the breakfast the following Monday - I was there. Most of the speakers who followed him echoed his recommendation. My edit was intended to bring the Wikipedia article up to date with Reverend Jackson's roll-out.Tcisco (talk) 02:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * You need to examine the edit history of the Jesse Jackson, Jr. Wikipedia article. It is void of edits under my user name.  You need to exercise greater diligence before charging someone with vandalism.Tcisco (talk) 02:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the apology, I was a member of one of the teams he met with at Rainbow/PUSH headquarters a couple of days before the broadcast. I was concerned with the failure of the Rainbow/PUSH article to simultaneously site the initiative with the roll-out.Tcisco (talk) 03:34, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost &mdash; February 23, 2009
This week, the Wikipedia Signpost published volume 5, issue 8, which includes these articles:


 * Philosophers analyze Wikipedia as a knowledge source
 * An automated article monitoring system for WikiProjects
 * News and notes: Wikimania, usability, picture contest, milestones
 * Wikipedia in the news: Lessons for Brits, patent citations
 * Dispatches: Hundredth Featured sound approaches
 * Wikiproject report: WikiProject Islam
 * Discussion Reports And Miscellaneous Articulations
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

The kinks are still being worked out in a new design for these Signpost deliveries, and we apologize for the plain format for this week.

Delivered by §hepBot  ( Disable )  at 22:18, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks and a request
Thanks for signing up at Peer review/volunteers and for your work doing reviews. It is now just over a year since the last peer review was archived with no repsonse after 14 (or more) days, something we all can be proud of. There is a new Peer review user box to track the backlog (peer reviews at least 4 days old with no substantial response), which can be found here. To include it on your user or talk page, please add. Thanks again, and keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch <sub style="color:green;">&gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:02, 25 February 2009 (UTC) PS You are now second in line ;-)

Even more recognition for your good work and dedication

 * WT:ARS Ikip (talk) 09:12, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Frankie Rayder
Hi there, congrats for your work on the article, just a couple of points....who is the fourth Rayder sister, and the one brother? I know of Frankie, Missy and Molly, but I didn't know there were two other siblings. Also, do you know if she actually married Flea? I tweeked the article earlier just to call Flea her partner rather than husband, because I didn't think they had actually had their wedding or if one has been arranged. You've done a great job with the article, well done :). Sky83 (talk) 16:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Hey there, I shall have a look at that link in a short while, I'm not sure if I'll be able to help, but I'll certainly try :). I mainly was interested in Frankie's article because I started reading about her through the Chili Peppers connection, but I do know a little in the model genre. Some places do tend to refer to Frankie and Flea as husband and wife, but I'm still not sure that they are, I've never come across anything, article or interview, that has ever mentioned a marriage date or wedding details. It's also possible they consider themselves husband and wife without actually going through the legal ceremony. I could be wrong here, but I think they are officially still engaged. Sky83 (talk) 16:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I too would prefer to go with the citation, but I'm not sure that is a wholly reliable one for determining their relationship status. If the source you are referring to is this one, it could very well be just assuming that they are married, as it doesn't give the direct quote that Flea had spoken. I'm by no means certain on this, but I'm yet to read anything that makes it clear they are actually married. Sky83 (talk) 17:01, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * All things considered, I think your suggestion is probably the best way to go for now. Before I picked up your message, I did a quick google for some confirmation either way and can't find a thing to say anything for sure. Something that reflects the confusion would be best for anyone stumbling upon the article :). Sky83 (talk) 17:16, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yes I would be happy to, but I'm not entirely sure how to cite the confusion. I doubt we'll find an article debating it, there are forums, but that's no good. What may be easiest would be to keep your reference for the 'wife' sentence and to address the confusion, perhaps something like Some sources state that the couple have married, but no official confirmation is available. How does that sound? Sky83 (talk) 17:32, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I found this for the GQ thing, it doesn't mention a year, but it is from Vogue so it's decent-ish. I'll add the sentence we agreed on, but I'll keep looking for some kind of confirmation, there might be something out there. Sky83 (talk) 17:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
 * My apologies, I went out last night, wasn't ignoring your message lol. I'll have a look for a source for the name change, I'll see what I can find. Not too sure what there is, a while back there was a high school record that showed it, but I'll have a scout around and see if there is anything else. Might take me a little while though, will be doing this while working lol. Sky83 (talk) 09:13, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Also I'm not sure what you could potentially do with this, but Frankie has attended benefits at Silverlake Conservatory of Music, the organisation that Flea co-founded. I'm not sure what she has done, fundraising etc, but this could make an interesting addition if her involvement could be substantiated. Sky83 (talk) 09:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Yeah, what you said was exactly why I didn't add it lol. If she just went because of the Flea connection, that's not really going to amount to much article-wise, but if we could find a source stating she has been actively involved in fundraising, or has personally donated money, that would be something. The website did once have a list of contributors but I can't find it on there anymore and I can't remember if Frankie's name was there or not. I'll keep an eye out for something else. Sky83 (talk) 15:24, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Good idea! It's odd that no one thought to do an article for Missy before now. I'll have a proper read through it in a bit :). Sky83 (talk) 15:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Navbox
Guess what I just found! (damn, hit the blacklist-i'll comment out the link, so you should edit this to view.) Hopefully this will speed things up, and give confirmation of what we already have. Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:06, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * Got excited too fast. Doesn't seem to be super reliable (finding some self-contradictions). Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:09, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * YAYYYYYYY http://www.vogue.fr/magazine/issue.aspx/Front-Cover/Year,2000/Month,March/Model,Rhea%20Durham/Editor,Joan%20Juliet%20Buck/Photographer,Ruven%20Afanador/Search,Editor/ Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

OK paris vogue is all done and double-checked against the official website. The girls on those boards are good - no errors at all! Calliopejen1 (talk) 02:36, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I don't remember which month, but I think for one month in 2000 they had two different covers claiming to be the same month. Calliopejen1 (talk) 03:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I am going to check it out for US Vogue and see if I run into any contradictions. I would rather use it than go downtown.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

One thing
Tony:

If you get a chance either before/after Saxbe ends happily, as it seems it will, could you look at the FAC for Franklin Knight Lane and weigh in after looking over the article? After four weeks, it is sitting at one support, no opposes, and it is likely starting to strain Raul's and Sandy's patience.--Wehwalt (talk) 02:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Missy Rayder, placeholder images
Tony, the consensus seems to be against the use of placeholder images, see: Centralized discussion/Image placeholders. – ukexpat (talk) 18:17, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Italian Vogue
Not sure. Its editor, Franca Sozzani, is always kind of doing her own thing. Also, Steven Meisel does their covers every month and there are certain models he doesn't like to work with so that might exclude some of the girls that other magazines are doing and we have articles on. Calliopejen1 (talk) 16:12, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:VA cities and mayors of 100,000 population
For the record, Arlington is a county, not an incorporated city, and it does not have a mayor. Should it really be included in this template?

Actually, the Bureau of the Census (where I worked for 20 years) considers Arlington to be an incorporated place, but not a city. They understand the legal niceties there. Rklear (talk) 00:53, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I suggest you remove Arlington. If you read references in the article you link to, you will see that the main reference is a Census Bureau table titled "List of incorporated places...". There is another link to an alphabetical "List of cities", but it notably does not include Arlington. Rklear (talk) 01:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Inauguration of Barack Obama Article
Thanks for the barnstar! I'd be happy to co-nominate the article for FA status. I need to take a look at it before doing so, though...just something in the article needs cleaning up. In this case, I would want the article to show its best in presentation for FA status.  → Lwalt ♦ talk 03:57, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

vogue covers
That's Lily Donaldson, Doutzen Kroes, Sasha Pivovarova, Hilary Rhoda, and Caroline Trentini. It actually was a foldout cover though. The other five on the inside part were Raquel Zimmermann, Agyness Deyn, Chanel Iman, and Jessica Stam, and Coco Rocha. The template is looking good. I'll give cleaning up the vogue italia ones a go. Calliopejen1 (talk) 17:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I think it's fine as is, but I'm more of a believer in wikipedia's under-construction status than others.... I think you can start rolling it out. Calliopejen1 (talk) 18:56, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * state=autocollapse does that. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm indifferent re collapse/autocollapse. It's pretty small to begin w. The message is fine - but why would you put a navbox on a talk page? Just so the article editors can decide whether to include it? Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:25, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I wouldn't do that, probably bc it's the fastest way to get it deleted. Being on the cover of Vogue isn't a particularly notable achievement unless you're a model. Calliopejen1 (talk) 22:32, 28 February 2009 (UTC)
 * I fixed the autocollapse issue, it was just a typo. We could make it so there's an override and you can choose collapse or not-collapse on a case-by-case basis. Even better might be, for models who only appear in one Vogue, to have a setting where when you open the box, the Vogue of interest is automatically expanded. I could set this up if you'd like. Thoughts? Calliopejen1 (talk) 23:29, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

John Beilein DYK issue
I changed the article and the DYK hook to conform more closely to the source, as the complaint was that the hook was inaccurate. Please check hook and article to make sure it is OK with you. &mdash; Mattisse (Talk) 19:09, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Fountain of Time
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Fountain of Time you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period.  Chzz  ►  23:43, 28 February 2009 (UTC)