User talk:Twelsht/Archive5

Peer Review
Check out Peer review/Youngstown, Ohio for some comments are the article. I will check some of them out today or tomorrow but you are welcome to help as well. Thanks! --Daysleeper47 14:38, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Billy Evans
Could I ask why you keep re-adding the category People from Ohio? He's already in the subcategory for People from Youngstown, Ohio, and individuals shouldn't be listed in both. MisfitToys 23:46, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 02:29, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Speedy deletion of Thomas G. McDonald
A tag has been placed on Thomas G. McDonald, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia per CSD a7.

Under the criteria for speedy deletion, articles that do not meet very basic Wikipedia criteria may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as an appropriate article, and if you can indicate why the subject of this article is appropriate, you may contest the tagging. To do this, add  on the top of the article and leave a note on the article's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would confirm its subject's notability under the guidelines.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion. To do this, add  on the top of the page (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag) and leave a note on the page's talk page explaining your position. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself. Thedjatclubrock :) (T/C) 16:51, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

September 2007
Please refrain from introducing inappropriate pages, such as Thomas G. McDonald, to Wikipedia. Doing so is not in accordance with our policies. If you would like to experiment, please use the sandbox. Thank you. King of &hearts;   &diams;   &clubs;  &spades; 16:54, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

Boardman
Since you've worked so much on Youngstown-area articles, I thought I'd let you know: a merger has been proposed (and disputed) for Boardman, Ohio and Boardman Township, Mahoning County, Ohio. Please offer your opinions on the Boardman, Ohio talk page. Nyttend 13:17, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the update. I'm inclined to support keeping the two articles separate. If there's anything I think I can add to the arguments already presented, I will certainly do so. - twelsht 15:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

WP:Youngstown Assessment
Twelsht, I have started assessing the quality of WP:Youngstown articles. You can view the project page at WikiProject Youngstown/Article Classification. I have assessed about half of the Youngstown-related articles and will work on the rest in the coming days. If you come across a Youngstown-related article which hasn't been assessed, please feel free to do so. Artles needing assessment can be viewed at Category:Unassessed Youngstown articles. Thanks, Daysleeper47 00:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * I've already contacted the user about running the script on dashes. I will take a look at the references today. --Daysleeper47 10:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * You are doing quite a bit on those citations. If you need help or know of a way for me to get involved without stepping over your work, let me know. --Daysleeper47 15:31, 1 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Just a note to tell you that I am out of town until Sunday evening, maybe Monday morning so I won't be able to keep up with any article changes or to assist the FA nom. I'm guessing it will close soon, and hopefully with a passed nomination! --Daysleeper47 02:46, 2 November 2007 (UTC)
 * I've actually gone out and asked eight different editors for their assistance in reviewing the article. Several are involved in GA and FA reviews and the remainder were editors who pushed Cleveland, Ohio to FA status. I have heard from one. Perhaps at least one or two of them will take a stab at reviewing the article and provide us with a Support. The article is now one of the older FA noms, so I'm guessing this won't last more than a few days longer and without a few more votes of support, it will fail again. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:36, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use Image:Meshel.gif
Thanks for uploading Image:Meshel.gif. I noticed the 'image' page specifies that the image is being used under fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first fair use criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed image could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information. If you believe this image is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the image description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original Replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace the fair use image by finding a freely licensed image of its subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or a similar) image under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our fair use criteria. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, fair use images which could be replaced by free-licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if not used in an article), per our Fair Use policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. —Remember the dot (talk) 03:05, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

WE DID IT!
Youngstown, Ohio = Wikipedia's newest Featured Article. Thanks for all your work. This was a frustrating process, but it was worth it. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 13:40, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

B to GA Status
Twelsht, I think those three articles are great, well cited, and worth nominating to GA. If you like, I am happy to nominate one or all. I personally am always leary about self-noms, so I would remove that worry from other users. Also, I would recommend not doing them all at once, but rather wait until one closes out before adding the other. Let me know what you think. Anything I can do to help promote Youngstown articles, I am happy to do. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 17:08, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. I archived the old peer review and cleaned up the current nom. I hope you don't mind. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 19:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Youngstown Ohio Works
Rather a good article ... well-researched, economically but articulately written, well-presented. It's a bit on the short side (1500 words of article text, excluding notes etc) is probably about the minimum for FA, I'd have thought, but no reason why you can't find 400 or so words to add. Areas for possible inclusion/expansion might be: a general piece of background on baseball (funding, sponsorship, economics, crowd size, how were the leagues different, when established then? you should be able to get all this for a competent baseball handbook); a bit of background about the club's players (all amateur, amateur/pro, earnings?); weaving in snippets of topical info (local newspapers can be a good source); more about local support (again local newspaper); any info about other players? There a few small MOS things but they could be sorted out in ten minutes by a good copy editor. In a nutshell, it's good, expand it a third and take it to FA. I hope this helps. All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 20:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your message. I'll gladly look the article through again in a couple of weeks. All the best, -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 08:44, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * That was quick! I forgot to mention earlier that the intro should be three or four paragraphs long, and summarise each of the sections that follow. That'll add another couple of hundred :) If you don't mind, I'll take a look at it later in the week as I'm trying to break the back of various Hamlet commitments so we can get it to FAC before the New Year. -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 16:33, 10 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for the news and the barnstar. I'm tickled pink. Impertinant I know but may I trouble you to write a citation for it referring to baseball that I can proudly display it in honour of my maiden contribution to the sport? -- R OGER D AVIES  talk 00:19, 11 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm just about to run over the article for manual of style (MOS) and any other stylistic tweaks that may seem appropriate. Great initiative, best luck with the FA process, it does give great feedback, often quite demanding, which is a good thing. ;) Alastair Haines (talk) 01:34, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * I'm back. Excellent work. Very little to change. My copy edit is not the final word, of course, two points regarding this. Firstly, there is still a general journalistic feel to the article. I didn't have the heart to change it. "Legendary career" is common in journalism, uncommon (but not absolutely forbidden) in encylopedias. There are a few adjectives like this sprinkled through the article. I actually think they are good encyclopedic style, because they break up dogged factual sentences, without being rhetorically hyperbolic as in journalism -- "Perhaps the most breath-taking batting of the season ..."
 * I left some punctuation the way it was, although it would not be my personal style, because it was consistant through the article. It is not a matter of right or wrong, and Wiki will never be able to achieve total consistancy of punctuation across articles anyway.
 * I did do a lot of dash-correction. In most cases these were easy decisions. In one or two, US and UK style may be different, I followed UK style, which is probably wrong. It is clearly a US article and should err in favour of US style. The ultimate example of this is with Ohio-Penn League or Ohio–Penn League. With very well-known pairings, like Franco-Prussian War, a hyphen is normal. In other cases, a psychologist–sociologist alliance, for example, suggests two groups in parallel, where a psychologist-sociologist alliance would be a professional association of people who are both psychs and socios.
 * Ohio-Penn League is possibly so old and well-known in the US that a hyphen is possibly appropriate, but from outside, I don't know that, so I put in the n-dashes. Take them out again if you want to. You're the expert not me. But beware, newspapers use hyphens instead of n-dashes to save space; but if US books use hyphens for Ohio-Penn League, follow them. ;)
 * Sorry I couldn't be more help, and best luck to you! :) Alastair Haines (talk) 03:21, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Shucks, and thanks for your thanks. ;) A journalistic background explains why the article is so very well written, and outstandingly sourced! Cheers. Alastair Haines (talk) 04:11, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Commented on the peer review page. Tito xd (?!? - cool stuff) 06:30, 9 December 2007 (UTC)


 * Twelsht, I would be happy to FA nom this article. I read it this morning and thought the same thing; I actually started to comment on your talk page this morning telling you to forget the GA nom and go with an FA nom. Alas, work got in the way and I never finished the message. I will take care of this forthwith. --Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:03, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
 * BTW, do you want to wait until the Peer Review is closed? I don't see the need, but it is your article...--Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)