User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 38

LivingBot
I have a few theories which I can follow up on. Basically it'll be a factor outside of my control: the toolserver can be a bit unstable sometimes. Sorry for any inconvenience, and you're welcome to add them yourself. - Jarry1250 [ In the UK? Sign the petition! ] 07:31, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Permanent urls to NewsBank articles?
Hi Tony. You're good at including reliable links to NewsBank articles in your cites. What's your secret to persistent urls that don't seem to expire or require login? Hugh (talk) 18:28, 1 September 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:0609Departments 411 06 0.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:0609Departments 411 06 0.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:09, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Disputed non-free use rationale for File:19280423 Time Magazine Cover of Ruth Hanna McCormick.jpg
Thank you for uploading File:19280423 Time Magazine Cover of Ruth Hanna McCormick.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale provided for using this file on Wikipedia may not meet the criteria required by Non-free content. This can be corrected by going to the file description page and adding or clarifying the reason why the file qualifies under this policy. Adding and completing one of the templates available from Non-free use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your file is in compliance with Wikipedia policy. Please be aware that a non-free use rationale is not the same as an image copyright tag; descriptions for files used under the non-free content policy require both a copyright tag and a non-free use rationale.

If it is determined that the file does not qualify under the non-free content policy, it might be deleted by an administrator within a few days in accordance with our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions, please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stifle (talk) 14:16, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

File:0609Departments 411 06 0.jpg
I have augmented the FUR at File:0609Departments 411 06 0.jpg. Is it now satisfactory?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:29, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That should be OK for now, although there is a small chance when I go over the images again in a few weeks that I might disagree with myself and nominate the image for FFD. If I do, I will of course warn you. Stifle (talk) 14:45, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Crown Fountain FAC 4
SkyscraperPage has been down for maintenance reasons since August 19, and may be down for a few more days - this happens about once every two years. However, since the website being down could jeopardize the FAC, you could reference this list of the tallest buildings in the United States by architectural height (or this, which includes only Chicago buildings) from the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat, which is widely regarded as one of the most reliable skyscraper resources.

I'm not sure about the Ultrapolis Project ranking - from this, it seems that the site uses a standard formula to achieve their rankings, although the site does state that "[t]he formula gives less weight for thin, ornamental spires and observation towers, and none for antennas", which seems pretty subjective. Since the ranking seems to be based on subjective statistical data, I don't think it should be included. Is mentioning that Chicago has the tallest skyline necessary in the article? Most information about the "world's tallest skylines" seems to come from blogs.

And I will try to update List of tallest buildings in Chicago today. Cheers, Rai • me  17:54, 2 September 2009 (UTC)

File source problem with File:Campbell's Soup with Can Opener.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Campbell's Soup with Can Opener.jpg. I noticed that the file's description page currently doesn't specify who created the content, so the copyright status is unclear. If you did not create this file yourself, you will need to specify the owner of the copyright. If you obtained it from a website, then a link to the website from which it was taken, together with a restatement of that website's terms of use of its content, is usually sufficient information. However, if the copyright holder is different from the website's publisher, their copyright should also be acknowledged.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. Unsourced and untagged images may be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If the image is copyrighted under a non-free license (per Fair use) then the image will be deleted 48 hours after 05:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC). If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Salavat (talk) 05:52, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

Ockie Anderson
Hey Tony. I've started working on college football articles again and started one on Ockie Anderson, All-American at Colgate and one of the leadings scorers in pro football while playing for the Buffalo All-Americans from 1920-1922. Given your interest in college football and Buffalo related, I thought you might be interested. If you have any suggestions, or additional sources, feel free to contribute, as always. Cbl62 (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)

nested is not needed anymore -read instructions please
Hi. concerning this edit of yours I would like just to inform you that nested is not used anymore. Banners are automatically nested when inside WPB or WPBS. Thanks, Magioladitis (talk) 14:17, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

*poke*
We are waiting on your input for Chicago auto-assessing magic.

What do you think of this matrix as far as class goes?

And what of Pknkly's suggestion to break categories in WP:CHIBOTCATS up by default lowest importance? (excluding those that were too complicated to make the call this way). If this second part is something you are going ahead with, it would make sense to combine both types of auto-assessments in a single run.

The template would also require modification. The suggestion made was to allow auto to take the class as an input rather than "yes" and (if you go ahead with importance), a new parameter and category should be created for those as well. Perhaps "autoimportance" would be the parameter, and if a user agreed all they would have to do is remove the "auto" part.

Let me know! –xenotalk 22:58, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Crown Fountain
Well, I've done with the lede what I can think of for now. It's not a dramatic improvement, like Eiffel Tower, because it was already pretty good. And while I think it's better now, I can imagine you'll want to change (or change back) some things.

My biggest concern is my lack of familiarity with the subject. Please take extra care to see not only any outright factual errors I may have inadvertently added, but more importantly, if the tone of the sections rings true. For example, does the stuff about controversies seem to make a bigger deal out of it than you remember? I have no way of knowing that, and am counting on you and your intimate knowledge to clean up any improper connotations I may have accidentally inserted. Cheers! Un sch  ool  23:38, 5 September 2009 (UTC)

Dennis Gorski
Are you clicking "show" a third time, once you've expanded the condensed list and the WPMILHIST section? Hohum (talk) 20:05, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

Bill Garcia Deletion
Hi Tony. I have just noticed that Bill Garcia article that has been in Wikipedia for years has been deleted. I would like to ask for your help in reinstating that article. Bill Garcia is one of the first Hispanic radio broadcasters in Chicago, Cleveland, Houston, Charlotte markets at a time when there was an extremely poor level of Hispanic broadcasters in the major market radio industry. He achieved top ratings in each major market and was viewed by many in the industry as a breakthrough talent. I noticed that was a discussion of lack of ratings information. Arbitron company which is the ratings source for every radio station in the country always showed Bill Garcia at the top of the ratings. I have included some published linked in Chicago Sun Times that indicate this. For the sake of letting future budding broadcasters get some history I request that you reinstate this article.

Links:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Bill_Garcia

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-4288692.html

http://www.djheadlines.com/index.php?pid=161

http://nl.newsbank.com/nl-search/we/Archives?p_action=list&p_topdoc=11

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1N1-101FF443456ADD06.html

http://radio.about.com/cs/latestradionews/a/aa121003a.htm

http://www.timewarner.com/corp/newsroom/pr/0,20812,670155,00.html

http://www.allbusiness.com/transportation-communications/communications-radio/4358183-1.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billus99 (talk • contribs) 15:03, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

GAN notice
Hi TonyTheTiger, you currently have at least one article up a WP:GAN in the Sports and recreation section. In an attempt to clear out the backlog there, User:Wizardman asked all sports WikiProjects to review at least two articles from that section. I'm now going around and asking anybody with an article nominated under Sports and recreation to review at least one article in that section to help us clear the backlog out so your articles can finally be reviewed faster!  iMatthew  talk  at 15:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Not a problem, thanks!  iMatthew  talk  at 16:55, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Cato June
I could see this at FAC as well. It's definitely detailed enough for that, and if anyone complains about the refs we both know that size is just due to the urls. I wouldn't mind a co-nom, I can certainly help out at FAC to fix anything, sans copyediting, I'm not great at that. Wizardman 16:16, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * That's probably the best option. Hopefully we get some good feedback. Wizardman  16:52, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Edit on Sixteen (Chicago restaurant)
I just rolledback an edit by you on Sixteen (Chicago restaurant) because you changed the refnames to "ASS". Was I in error? If so, please accept my apology and revert me. Have a great day! GrooveDog (oh hai.) 21:27, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Whoops, misread Lupin's tool. My apologies! Have a nice day. GrooveDog (oh hai.) 21:28, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

I've passed the article. Keep up the good work!--Edge3 (talk) 01:30, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

voting for Top-importance Chicago articles
Hi Tony, thanks for the invite, but I am not familiar enough with the articles to vote on them. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:44, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Picture question
Tony, I was doing a major cleanup of an article last winter, and really wanted to add an image. I found none in Wikimedia Commons, so I went to Flickr. There I found some wonderful pictures, none of which I could use, because of the copyright restrictions. They were almost perfectly free, but not quite. Anyway, looking at you pulling those pictures for Crown Fountain from Flickr, I'm wondering: Did the changes in our copyright policy earlier this year change what I can take from Flickr? I had a heck of a time understanding the old policy, where do I go to have the new policy explained to me? Un sch  ool  02:51, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Theodore Roosevelt
Hey, Tony, I'll be interested to know what you think about the new lead over at TR's page. Before you look, I have to tell you, you're likely to be disappointed.

This was hard. TR is, to put it simply, one of the greatest figures in modern world history. He did so much. I think that Lincoln was clearly our greatest president, and Washington was arguably our greatest leader, but TR was one of the greatest men to have lived in the United States. So trimming the lead was extremely difficult. In fact, on my first attempt, I ended up making it longer! I'm not kidding! You see, the lead was long, but it was also poorly done. What I did was first write a lead that was (unintentionally) longer, but better. Then I had to trim it down.

And so what you now see remains longer than your 3200 character goal. But it's pretty good, and I'm satisfied with what I did. I hope you are, too. Un sch  ool  04:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

My votes here and rationale for your further consideration
Hello Tony. I have cast my votes at the above-named location - scroll down to my name at the end of the list. I would not normally come to your page to tell you of such an edit but in this case I have used a particular rationale and method which I think is deserving of your further consideration; and so I ask you to re-visit and make further comment if you wish. If there is some other way that I can assist or if you have any further questions please come to my talk page at any time. With thanks -- VirtualSteve need admin support? 04:28, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

LEAD
I blew my deadline. Apologies, I'll mention it next week. Hiding T 11:02, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

AL WISTERT
it is reliable

I KNOW FIRST HAND

Al thanked me last week

see, I GOT JEFF LURIE TO PUT AL IN THE RING OF HONOR

SO LEAVE MY EDITS BE —Preceding unsigned comment added by AFOS4EVER (talk • contribs) 20:18, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Al Wistert part 2
as far as Philly rags go - I HAVE TRIED to tell them Al is going in 9/27 (with another Eagle, though I did ask who it was)during the second home game against the Chiefs.

see, Lurie's office contacted me earlier this year after a media blitz I did on them for disrespecting Al for sooooo long. I have been working with them for months, even providing them his profile/ story.

I added things his wiki page does not have, because it is important people know how important Al STILL is to the NFL.

I have also talked with Al for hours during these months.

A few weeks ago, Lurie's personal assistant (the one I've dealt with mostly) called me and asked for Al's phone number. Then they told me the next week to call Al, because they rather have Al tell me the good news. I heard it, and called Lurie to thank him.

It IS confirmed!

Why the loser Philly press won't mention it is beyond me —Preceding unsigned comment added by AFOS4EVER (talk • contribs) 20:36, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

so actually talking with Jeff Lurie = THE EAGLES OWNER = isn't reliable?

well anyways

keep your eyes peeled on philly.com

just talked to a sports staff writer for the Inquirer

gave him Al's number too

he is aware of the Honor Roll gig

but says they are waiting until the week of the 27th to run stories

though he now plans to do a little blurb on it this week

possibly soon

he just wants to talk with Al first to flesh out the story

forgot his name, but he tells me he just did a story on John Cheney/ Viv Stringer being honored

how about leaving my edits be until after the 27th?

If Al somehow isn't put in, remove it

of course, I will be up the Eagles asses if that doesn't happen

listening to the radio = you might have to wait until halftime of the KC game to learn anything —Preceding unsigned comment added by AFOS4EVER (talk • contribs) 21:13, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

btw - i am "the press" lol

just not a Philly press member —Preceding unsigned comment added by AFOS4EVER (talk • contribs) 21:15, 8 September 2009 (UTC)

Help
Thanks for responding. I would like to see the article for Bill Garcia reinstated complete with those great Chicago links that were implemented. The article for Bill Garcia has been in Wikipedia for years and I would like your help in having it put back up, please. It would be historical in content for many future broadcasters who have a minority background and can look back at how Bill Garcia among others paved the way for minorities to make it to the mainstream media. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Billus99 (talk • contribs) 03:25, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

YATBot
Hi, I might eventually add the tagging function for that, but right now I'm really busy. It seems Xeno has it under control for right now. Thanks. AHRtbA== Talk 18:27, 9 September 2009 (UTC)

Can old Chicago Project subpage be used?
Please look at the proposed use and advise at Can this be reused. I'm trying to reverse engineer the category processes and need a place to document what I find. I hope other established Chicago Project members with knowledge about categories can contribute. Pknkly (talk) 06:30, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Not planning to keep up the the category list in the subpage - I'm planning to delete it! Still good? Please look at narrative in the article before the information I plan to delete. I found another template based category list. So, there were three that have accumulated throughout the years. I will pose a question about the template based process within Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chicago/Categories.Pknkly (talk) 07:19, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Boyce bldg
Cool photo, many thanks! — Rlevse • Talk  • 10:01, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Check William_D._Boyce. Oh, did I get the address correct?  — Rlevse • Talk  • 10:07, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The address discrepancy comes from there having been two different Boyce buildings, but I've looked into it and the one you took is the 500-510 one, the one I wanted, thanks.  — Rlevse • Talk  • 23:14, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

Review articles
Hey Tony,

My students are starting their project for WikiProject Chicago. Once a student has finished an article and they think it meets Good Article status, how do they get others to evaluate it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by MrSilva (talk • contribs) 14:37, 10 September 2009 (UTC)

E. H. Harriman
This article came up for audit within the Chicago Project Category clean up. Since you were the person who put the Chicago tag into its Talk I thought I would leave this one up to you. Perhaps you will recall your reason for placing the Chicago tag. Pknkly (talk) 04:02, 12 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Got your message. I'll delete tag. Pknkly (talk) 04:15, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Vincent
Tony, you have Callow and Gayford marked as "Tertiary sources, with little or no reference to sources". Can you let me know your basis for this? If you are correct (I assume you are, just need to know the reasoning so it doesn't happen again), I suppose we should just remove them outright. At this point in the article's development, I'd like to get a copyeditor or two in, before we expand the latter portions of the page. Any suggestions; a lot of the c/e'rs I depended on have left, and as you know those pople are like gold dust. Ceoil (talk) 13:18, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok I assumed it was something that came up in the GAR, perhalps Modernist is aware of the reasoning. I can only go so far with a copy edit; you know how it is with article you are close to. Look forward to your help. The bits left to be expanded are widely covered by the sources, the work load is not as much as you might think. It would be brilliant to get this to FA, given the notability of the subject, and the difficulty about discussing him, it would be something we could be proud to hold up. Ceoil (talk) 13:38, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Tony thanks; no worries and no rush with this. As you can imagine, if we take to FAC it will attract a lot of attention and likely be a long candidacy. I remember your work on the Warhol, which is why I would like you on side. We need a good team to get this through. Ceoil (talk) 13:57, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Arthur Eve
Unfortunately I haven't been able to return to Arthur for a couple of days. Now, I'm going to be away from 14th to 18th. I will try tomorrow to find a bit of time to proceed with the review, but I can't promise – it may have to wait ntil I get back. I hope that's not too much of a problem. Brianboulton (talk) 20:49, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Reviews completed 19 September Brianboulton (talk) 21:46, 19 September 2009 (UTC)

Chicago Project possible disambig tagging conflict
Please review, advise on possible disambig article tagging conflict. Pknkly (talk) 21:00, 12 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
Dabomb87 (talk) 03:34, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

TR
Gotta hand it to you, that was a great edit. My points of disagreement are microscopic. And yes, I see that you got it below 3200. While I greatly admire the skill you brought to that edit, it doesn't change my stance, which is a matter of principle. Good job, though, TTT. Un sch  ool  04:55, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking over your edit, I must say, your work on the first paragraph was positively fantastic. I had a couple of things I had been uncomfortable with, including the colon in the first sentence, and the entire last sentence. Your dismissal of the colon was perfect, and while the final sentence is not quite perfect, it's an improvement over mine.  Thanks.  Un  sch  ool  05:31, 13 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I had the word "successful" in there to contrast between the US effort under TR to the effort by the French. But you're right, it's not necessary in there.  I did put back one word, "annointed", for reasons explained in my edit summary.   Un  sch  ool  05:37, 13 September 2009 (UTC)

Extending scope
My reply to Indiana Territory is at User talk:Pknkly. If you are still up, I'll read your response tomorrow. I'm calling it a day. Good morning to you. Pknkly (talk) 06:44, 14 September 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. I just needed to print something humorous as a joke. I'm done. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Fonad2 (talk • contribs) 06:17, 15 September 2009 (UTC)

Re Crown Fountain FAC 4
I do not know how to make or edit ogg files - I think does. You could also ask at the Graphics lab. I will try to take a look at the article and FAC. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I just supported - I did not read the last sections as closely as I wanted to, hopefully will reread them in the next several hours. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:33, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Glad to help and sorry for the dead end suggestion of the video... I thought it would help, not hurt things. I am done with copyedits on the article and comments on the FAC but am watching the FAC. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 22:15, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Request for Participation in Wikipedia Research
TonyTheTiger,

Your Request for Adminship (RfA) process was reviewed and studied by our research team at Carnegie Mellon University early in our project to gain insights into the process. We reviewed what voters discussed about your case, and what qualifications you brought to the table as a candidate. In total 50 cases were personally read and reviewed, and we based our further research questions in part on your case.

In continuing our research, I would like to personally invite you to participate in a survey we are conducting to get perspective from people who have participate in the RfA process. The survey will only take a few minutes of your time, and will aid furthering our understanding of online communities, and may assist in the development of tools to assist voters in making RfA evaluations. We are NOT attempting to spam anyone with this survey and are doing our best to be considerate and not instrusive in the Wikipedia community. The results of this survey are for academic research and are not used for any profit nor sold to any companies. We will also post our results back to the Wikipedia community.

This survey is part of an ongoing research project by students and faculty at the Carnegie Mellon University School of Computer Science and headed by Professor Robert Kraut.

Take the survey

Thank you!

If you have any questions or concerns, feel free comment on my talk page.

CMUResearcher (talk) 19:19, 17 September 2009 (UTC)

Ogg
Ogg is actually two very different formats, I can only edit the audio one. I believe User:Seddon and User:Cirt are able to do video editing. Shoemaker's Holiday Over 206 FCs served 19:41, 17 September 2009 (UTC)


 * Heya tony, I would be more than willing to edit this file for you. It might take me a day or so as I need to install new editting software to edit theora but give me a poke on saturday if i havnt got back to you yet. Sedd&sigma;n talk|WikimediaUK 00:28, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Y'arghh, there be no rough seas ahead, tis smooth sailing from here on in. But aye, if me ha'n't got back t' you by the turn of of the new day at 0000 UPC (Universal Pirate Time), feel free t' make me walk the plank. Arghhhh talk|WikimediaUK 00:13, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Arghh, ye not be clued up me hearty. See, today be internaaaational speak like a pirate day. I hope ye be knowin' alot more now. Arghhhh talk|WikimediaUK 00:33, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
 * I was working on this less than simple task for you but given your lack of patience and clear lack of appreciation, do look elsewhere. Seddon talk|WikimediaUK 10:34, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Notice
Hi. I'm posting to let you know that your name has been mentioned on a list of Highly active users on the talk page for RfA's here. If you are interested in running for administratorship, or if you would like to make any comments, feel free to join the discussion. -- <B>Soap</B> Talk/Contributions 17:34, 18 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 21 September 2009

 * From the editor: Call for opinion pieces
 * News and notes: Footnotes updated, WMF office and jobs, Strategic Planning and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Wales everywhere, participation statistics, and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject Video games
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:07, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

GA Help
Hi, since you have a lot of GAs and review them, and cause it looks like u got the Chicago Marathon up to GA, what do you suggest for me to do to get Bix 7 Road Race and Memorial Jazz Festival up to GA? Thanks for your help.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 06:10, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * So basically I just need to broaden the coverage of the material? Everything else looks good to me.  C T J F 8 3 Talk 06:21, 23 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Ok, thank you for your help!  C T J F 8 3 Talk 06:29, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Statues in Chicago
Tony, I've tagged a bunch of your statue images as non-free 3d art and missing fair use rationales, putting them for deletion. Statues in the United States, even if displayed in a public location, are not free of copyright protections just by way of being in a public place. If you photograph them, you create a derivative work. The original copyright holder retains some rights to derivative works. Thus, these images are not free. There is no freedom of panorama in the United States. --Hammersoft (talk) 21:17, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Thanks
Just saying thank you for your very useful feedback at Brain/GA1. --Tryptofish (talk) 23:24, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

Honest Abe FA/GA
Are you interested in helping to get Abraham Lincoln to FA? I saw your GA review, and I know you like Illinois related articles, and I'm looking for help. Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 05:25, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Also, could we get it re-opened as PGA? We kinda weren't finished yet, as you can see from the flurry on the talk page Purplebackpack89 (talk) 05:38, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
I do get your point. It is a good one. However, I hope you agree that it needs limits. Pknkly (talk) 15:56, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Got your replies. Thanks. Pknkly (talk) 16:21, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Answers to your questions. Pknkly (talk) 06:53, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

Talkback
I think this is an important section. Please review and comment. I believe I captured your statement within the section. Please edit it if I did not. Pknkly (talk) 17:15, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

pretty funny kid
do you now see Al IS going in this Sunday :D

here is your proof junior:

http://www.phillyburbs.com/opinions/blogs/burbsblogs/sports/4th_and_26.html

feel foolish with all your wasted bickering and taking off my edits that made Al's page 100% better?

I would

BTW - that page you set up for Al is not a good job

YOU REALLY DISRESPECT HIM WITH BAD FACTS AND MANY OMISSIONS

I made your page better, but you got a little hot headed and ran to the admin

even after I asked you to wait until this Sunday

Fight Club
While I would like for Fight Club (film) to be on the main page, I noticed on Today's featured article/October 2009 that Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country, another film article, is displaying on October 6. Is this close proximity to Fight Club a problem? Is the schedule set in stone? Erik (talk &#124; contribs &#124; wt:film) 15:32, 26 September 2009 (UTC)

2009-10 NCAA Basketball Conference pages
Hey - I saw that you tried to marshall support to create conference pages last season and wanted to see if you wanted to try and get organized prior to this year. I know you've started Big Ten page and Jober14 can probably be counted on to do the ACC page. With a little organization, maybe we can get all D1 conferences going? I'd be willing to maintain 2-3 pages. It might be easier to make this happen early, rather than try to create them at the end of the year (more work). What do you think? Rikster2 (talk) 20:45, 27 September 2009 (UTC)

Template:2009-10 NCAA Division I FBS football conferences

 * Too much work to do it. Thanks. Bband11th (talk) 00:29, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Here we go, it's done or a work in progress. See how you like the format of the 2009 Pac-10 Conference football season. Bband11th (talk) 16:38, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Watchlist table would be just too long. Each conference season article should have highlights and notes. They are the meats of the season. Bband11th (talk) 16:47, 29 September 2009 (UTC)

Re:Template:2009-10 NCAA Division I FBS football conferences
Done. :) <b style="color:red;">De</b><b style="color:green;">Fault</b><b style="color:blue;">Ryan</b> 20:10, 28 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Actually, I created and did most of the work on 2009 Mountain West Conference football season, so I'm familiar with the possible content :) I just don't have time to take over the 2009 Conference USA football season article. I'm hoping that by starting it, somebody else who is interested in it can take over and expand it. <b style="color:red;">De</b><b style="color:green;">Fault</b><b style="color:blue;">Ryan</b> 21:55, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 28 September 2009

 * Opinion essay: White Barbarian
 * Localisation improvements: LocalisationUpdate has gone live
 * Office hours: Sue Gardner answers questions from community
 * News and notes: Vibber resigns, Staff office hours, Flagged Revs, new research and more
 * Wikipedia in the news: Stunting of growth, Polanski protected and more
 * Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
 * WikiProject report: WikiProject National Register of Historic Places
 * Features and admins: Approved this week
 * Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
 * Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:04, 30 September 2009 (UTC)

Re: Encyclopedia of Chicago
The bot did that because its wiki syntax parsing logic isn't super-smart. In particular, it guesses that the infobox book template ends at the first "}}" it finds after the infobox starts, thus the nested "cite" template it this case fooled it, so the existing oclc param was outside of where it thought the template ended. This generally hasn't been a problem since the isbn & oclc parameters are usually adjacent to each other, but that was not the case on that particular article. --<b style="color:#3773A5;">Cyber</b> cobra (talk) 15:30, 30 September 2009 (UTC)