User talk:Trust Is All You Need/Archive 3

GA Reviews
Hello again, just a friendly notice that Aiden Ford, Evan Lorne, John Doggett and Sleepless (The X-Files) are all being reviewed. There isn't any particular rush, so have fun! Sanguis Sanies (talk) 19:27, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

CITE problems
I'll put this here so that I don't have to copy-paste it however many times.

WP:CITE states that "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged should be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation."

Using a CITE to cover an entire paragraph is not good enough for GA-Status. Every time a claim is made there needs to be a CITE so the golden rule is: "at least one CITE per sentence."

If we use one of the GAs that I worked on Murder of Teresa de Simone as an example you will notice that virtually every sentence has at least one CITE. Several CITEs are used repeatedly, but that's fine, every claim has a supporting CITE. All the information in the article can be proven.

Sleepless
All remaining recommendations on Sleepless have been addressed, with the exception of two reference items that I believe you originally added to the article. See the talk page for details. Should be a relatively easy fix. Quiddity99 (talk) 04:09, 27 November 2009 (UTC)Quiddity99

I've had a double check over them and they all appear to be fine, I will pass them at the end of the day (my time), so around this time-ish tomorrow. Sanguis Sanies (talk) 18:13, 1 December 2009 (UTC)

GA Reassessment of Without (The X-Files)
Without (The X-Files) has been nominated for a good article reassessment. Please leave your comments and help us to return the article to good article quality. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Reviewers' concerns are here. talk 15:54, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Socialist Left
So what was the reason for deleting the rest of the ideologies then?? It's not only right-wing parties that can be eurosceptic you know.. -GabaG (talk) 16:04, 29 November 2009 (UTC)
 * "Easier to navigate through"? If it's too hard to read more than two words I don't think an encyclopedia is the right place to be. Or is it that socialist parties are to be exempt from the same as all other parties when it comes to using more than one "ideology" in the ideologies-section? Just saying it is unfair to just pick out one single party and make special rules for it compared to the general style of all others. -GabaG (talk) 16:38, 29 November 2009 (UTC)


 * If that is what you seek, you should instead go here an argue for the template itself, not on one single party's infobox. As you can see I actually have raised a similar suggestion earlier (second lowest), however it seemed best to not go forward with the idea. -GabaG (talk) 23:40, 29 November 2009 (UTC)

Edit summary
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary. Geschichte (talk) 23:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

Two projects' WP 1.0 categories
I am the maintainer of the WP 1.0 bot. I was doing some testing and I noticed that two projects had categories that were confusing the WP 1.0 bot: Category:Science fiction articles by quality and Category:Politics articles by quality. The problem is that these had subcategories for other wikiprojects, such as the Socialism wikiproject within the Politics category, or the X-Files and Stargate articles within the Science fiction category.

The bot does not pick up all these subcategories; there can be only one "FA-Class", only one "GA-Class", etc. within each "by quality" category. These projects were the only two projects, out of over 1500, that had this problem, so I went ahead and reorganized the category structures. It is hard to make the bot work around this problem because of other quirks that many more projects have in their category naming.

Now, the tables generated by WP 1.0 bot for these projects will be correct. If you would like the X-Files and Stargate projects to also count towards the Science fiction table, just have their assessment templates add the articles to both sets of categories (e.g. Stargate and Science fiction). &mdash; Carl (CBM · talk) 23:54, 7 December 2009 (UTC)

"No More Good Days"
Hey, I just stumbled upon the "No More Good Days" article and was very impressed with it! As you seem to be the biggest contributor, I wanted to give you a shout out. Nice job! Have you considered nominating it for GAN? —  Hunter  Kahn  ( c )  01:31, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Erling Folkvord for DYK?
Will you nominate the article yourself when you are done with the expansion? Otherwise I will. __meco (talk) 15:16, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:John Cho (FlashForward).JPG
 Thanks for uploading File:John Cho (FlashForward).JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Skier Dude ( talk ) 03:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Millennium (season 1)
The article Millennium (season 1) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Millennium (season 1) for things needed to be addressed. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:08, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
 * Hi, do you intend to make any further improvements? Jezhotwells (talk) 12:04, 27 December 2009 (UTC)

Via Negativa (The X-Files)
I have completed an initial GA assessment of Via Negativa (The X-Files), and placed the article on hold for one week. You can see the specific issues remaining on the article talk page. If you've any questions, please feel free to post either there or on my talk page. Lankiveil (speak to me) 11:32, 19 December 2009 (UTC).

Category pages
Are category pages and are not classified by importance or any other criteria - they are not assessed SatuSuro 13:30, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey how were you to konw? - anyone who is interested in category pages should never be discouraged - have a look (if you want to look - its up to you)
 * 1) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide#Article_tagging
 * 2) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Council/Guide/WikiProject#Over-tagging

they might give an idea SatuSuro 13:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

but... a lot depends on the project/subject - if you are the slightest interested - check my edit history http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Contributions/SatuSuro - and you will see as i tag for different projects some projects might have different styles of project tag names and formats (like New zealand has WPNZ, and food has WPFOOD) it is best to go to a projects main page and see if they have instructions... also some projects have very specific bot required tags - the medicine project never uses WikiProject Medicine - and I incorrectly did some like that and still have to clean that lot up

Actual assessment - there are heaps and heaps of guidelines put in some project pages - for instance http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:WikiProject_Food_and_drink/Assessment#Quality_scale - but hey it can be daunting - the main guideline I could give is always go for lower than higher on quality and importance - and check that you are putting in as few project tags if you are putting them in. It is very important if you are not sure - to put something either in your edit summary, or in the talk page as to what you are doing or not sure of - then someone can know what to do to correct something - my edit summaries are not a good example.

Hope thats not too much information on the subject SatuSuro 13:47, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

You may find some projects or editors insist on putting class=category in the category talk pages - I always leave category talk pages with default tags - ie WikiProject Socialism with no extra text in the tag - there may well be some good reason for that - that has been explained to me in the past but I have forgotten who and where - some project assessment bots only like the shortcut tags... SatuSuro 13:53, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

also templates are not rated either :) SatuSuro 14:40, 19 December 2009 (UTC)

Peer review
I noticed Peer review/Norwegian parliamentary election, 2009/archive1 had been archived without comments, so I restired it as a PR and made some comments - nt sure if you were still watching it, so I thought I'd give you a notice here of the PR comments. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 05:18, 21 December 2009 (UTC)

Re: Template:Red (Norway)
I don't see the county chapters of Red Youth as likely article subjects. Do you? Geschichte (talk) 21:15, 28 December 2009 (UTC)

Norwegian political parties
Just wanted to make clear with my last comment that it is inappropriate to in this Template:Norwegian political parties add local municipal parties (then you have to add all kinds of village lists (bygdelister) and so on), inactive parties, and micro parties that have no importance whatsoever. By the way, there are FAR more parties in the UK than those few that are listed in that navbox also. It would be meaningless to do so - actually in many navboxes only parties represented in the different parliaments are used. (By the way, I hope it was a joke, concerning the above comment, where you planned to make articles for every single county chapter for the tiny party Red, and even its youth organisation(!!).) -TheG (talk) 23:37, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Ivar Hippe for DYK?
Will you nominate the article yourself? Otherwise I will. __meco (talk) 18:35, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure?
Is Fernandez really a socialist? The party he leads is supposedly becoming conservative. Just asking. SamEV (talk) 21:29, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

"i don't know about the future". Darn it. I was hoping you were the one who did! :)

Hey, thanks for the reply. The reason you gave seems good. SamEV (talk) 22:08, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, now I feel bad for you, that it's you and not I doing the research, since my question is only based on an unsourced statement (unless the sources in the other paragraphs support it) at Dominican Republic, which calls the PLD an "increasingly conservative" party. However, and in my defense, I'm trying to get back to working on a thorough cleanup of the D.R. article this afternoon, which I've been preparing offline; hence my reluctance to research the PLD's politics right now. But I did a make a mental note to look it up 'some day'—for whatever that's worth! SamEV (talk) 22:31, 10 January 2010 (UTC)

GA review of The X-Files (film)
Hi. Since you are this article's nominator, this is just to let you know that I have started the review process for The X-Files (film). I'll try to report back as soon as I can. SuperMarioMan (talk) 17:29, 17 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for notifying me. --TIAYN (talk) 17:44, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Fox → GA
Hi. I offered Megan Fox for nomination in GA. Mobody object, as I can see, but problem is that I don't know how nominate. Can you help me? --Алый Король (talk) 18:03, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of No More Good Days
The article No More Good Days you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:No More Good Days for things which need to be addressed. Frickative 15:00, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

dyk hook question
I have a question about your dyk hook here. Could you clarify? Thanks, — mattisse (Talk) 21:35, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

East Germany
Before I revert your edits, what was your idea behind deleting information, such as the entire list of notable East Germans? Did I miss another place you found to include this information?Trackinfo (talk) 04:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi again..
Actually I generally think you have done a great work on expanding many articles which coincident with some of the realated articles I edit. However, I have to say that I think you sometimes make some rather unconsensused edits, favoring your "personal taste", and disfavoring the manual of style of Wikipedia. This includes your rather odd Red party template which incorporate numerous utterly non-notable elements, and with the Socialist Left Party infobox ideology where you continue to oppose general guidelines (quite frankly I don't understand what you think are so horrible and wrong with it). -TheG (talk) 22:22, 28 January 2010 (UTC)
 * Because there is never a reason for using refs for already undisputed and linked facts such as a election results table. In all the political party articles on Wikipedia I have never seen anything close to it before. It just makes a total mess of the article for no good reason. -TheG (talk) 11:23, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Project Socialism
Hiya. I just signed up for the Wiki Project Socialism group. Please let me know how I can help. Carrite (talk) 02:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

GA Review for Pilot (Twin Peaks)
Hello. I'm following up here to let you know I'm going to conclude the review for this article in 24 hours. Most of what I brought up to be addressed has not been changed, so if there is no response or it is unlikely you will be able to address the points in the review in 24 hours, the article will be failed. Please let me know if you have questions. Thank you. --Moni3 (talk) 16:14, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Please, stop inserting template at CFK bio
Given that your template can be misleading for most people, and that you are editing a living person bio page, you'd rather have a source from CFK stating she considers her political project to be within the scope of socialist aims. In any other case, please refrain to add the socialist template. You are warned by the Bio Noticeboard rules.

Excuse my emphasis on the subject, please. --IANVS (talk) 09:48, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

Libertarian category deletions
You have not supplied a reason for speedy deleting these categories. They will not be deleted if there is no clear reason to do so. Please either supply a valid criteria for each deletion or remove the tags. Beeblebrox (talk) 22:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Before you add the delete tag, you need to remove the articles from the category. - Tbsdy (formerly Ta bu shi da yu) talk 00:59, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Libertarianism
Please do not change the project beyond recognition without consulting the editors that contribute to the articles. Wikipedia is built on consensus. Bastin 01:08, 2 February 2010 (UTC)


 * It's not inactive at all - the tags and hierarchy it establishes are a useful tool for editors. Just because it doesn't have centrally-planned construction edicts doesn't make it inactive.  If you think there is demand for a WikiProject dedicated to liberalism, create one - don't bulldoze other people's project.  WikiProjects have the ability to create hierarchy through parent projects.  Nobody would argue with you creating WikiProject Liberalism as a parent of WikiProject Libertarianism and a child of WikiProject Politics.  Bastin 14:52, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

Zeidler
Per your question about whether I have any Zeidler pictures, I see there is a really bad, old age picture of him attached to that external link at the bottom of Socialist Party of America. I've definitely got a picture of him somewhere in his prime, I'll see if I can find it and get it up on WP. There is also a GLARING need for a picture of Norman Thomas on the SPA page... There have been at least FOUR efforts to do that in the last couple years and they always get roboted away, even though they've been either copyright clear images or (in one case) an image with explicit approval from the copyright holder for use on WP. It's REALLY frustrating... Carrite (talk) 18:52, 3 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Now up on his page and SPA page... File:Zeidler-frank-1960.jpg Carrite (talk) 19:15, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Socialism
Single-payer health care has everything to do with socialism. It essentially removes the role of the private sector in the health insurance industry. The National Health Service (NHS) in Britain is an ideal example of socialized medicine. FitzColinGerald (talk) 22:36, 4 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Even if the United Kingdom allows private health insurance, the NHS is still an overwhelmingly socialized healthcare system. Whenever the government dictates the kind of medical procedures that a person either can or cannot receive according to cost, that is socialism. It is supposed to be a give-and-take relationship between the government and its people, yet it far too often becomes one-sided in favor of the government. That is why socialism (like communism) may be great in theory, but horrendous in practice. FitzColinGerald (talk) 20:26, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Socialist Mayors
Your list includes the ones that I knew off the top of my head: Hoan, Seidel, Zeidler, Wilson, McLevy, Van Lear. I will keep you in mind as I come across these things. There were probably several dozen lesser-known names from the decade of the 1910s... Carrite (talk) 23:19, 4 February 2010 (UTC)

Oops
I have moved Trust Is All You Need/WikiProject Liberalism list to User:Trust Is All You Need/WikiProject Liberalism list. &mdash; RHaworth 07:24, 6 February 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! --TIAYN (talk) 07:35, 6 February 2010 (UTC)