User talk:Twofingered Typist/Archives/2019/September

FA nom Digital media use and mental health
Thanks so much again for the copy edit! There's been several reviews since then, with 3x supports so far at the FA nom. Was wondering if you had time to drop by and review? Thanks Peter -- [E.3]  [chat2]  [me]   14:40, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Yes. It could do with a competent copy editor casting an eye over it. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:52, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

India
I wrote the history, geography, and biodiversity sections a long time ago.

Over a month ago, when the article's TFA appearance first came to be discussed, I had just finished rewriting the lead. I had vaguely aspired then to rewrite the Society and Culture sections as well. In the end, I could manage only Clothing and Cuisine, and they somewhat hurriedly.

So. thank you for copy editing India. You've given me a new appreciation for the precision and the judicious choices involved in this textual intervention, especially in the form that rises to the felicitous. Best regards, Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  19:16, 21 September 2019 (UTC)


 * You're very welcome. I'm almost finished going through the Bibliography and then I'll be done. If you look at the edit history you'll see a couple of notes re. the text. Performing Arts and Media section could use updating at some point. There is a statement in the Demographics section that needs clarification. It could be hidden for now until that can be tackled. I would say the article is in great shape for its appearance as a TFA. Regards, Twofingered Typist (talk) 19:41, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
 * Thank you. Will do. I don't mean to be importuning you, but if you could take a look at the lead as well, I would really appreciate it.  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  20:21, 21 September 2019 (UTC)

Hey TT, I noticed that you recorded 20 total articles in the GOCE September Drive while only listing 19 completed articles. I think you forgot to list India. Bobbychan193 (talk) 16:52, 25 September 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 23
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited India, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Palgrave ([//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dablinks.py/India check to confirm] | [//dispenser.info.tm/~dispenser/cgi-bin/dab_solver.py/India?client=notify fix with Dab solver]).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:35, 23 September 2019 (UTC)

September 2019 GOCE Newsletter
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 03:58, 24 September 2019 (UTC)

Snooker FA review
Hi Twofingered Typist, as I know you are interested in cue sports and have edited snooker articles before, I wonder if you would like to take a quick look at the 2019 World Snooker Championship article for us? It's currently going through an FA review and we're looking for constructive comments and support for the FA to move things forward. Please can you assist? Thanks, Rodney Baggins (talk) 10:49, 26 September 2019 (UTC)

I would be happy to check the article for you but it may take me a day or so. I am editing a Guild of Copy Editors request for an article on Vietnam at the moment, which is some 13,000 words long. Hope that is okay. Regards - Twofingered Typist (talk) 11:38, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Thank you for showing an interest. There's absolutely no rush at all, as I know only too well that we all do this in our spare time, but if you wouldn't mind putting it on your ToDo list... I expect Lee wants to get this done within the next couple of weeks, but if you don't get round to it we won't hold it against you! Thanks again, Rodney Baggins (talk) 13:13, 26 September 2019 (UTC)


 * Hi, thank you very much for looking at this article for us. I went through your edits and everything looks good, apart from one thing: you changed "The last 16 players" to "The remaining 16 players" at the start of the Second round section. This round is quite often referred to as "the last 16" so that wording was intentional and I've put it back the way it was. I've also got rid of the Mirror citation as it's not considered to be a reliable source and probably wouldn't get through the FA source review as it stands. In fact the cold arena snippet is only sourced in tabloids as far as I can tell, so it probably wasn't notable enough to be picked up by the reliable media and I've pulled it out altogether. If you're happy to support the article at this stage, please could you add a new section on the FA review page with a brief statement of what you've found in your run-through so the co-ordinator can see that you are supporting it. Thanks again for your help, very much appreciated! Rodney Baggins (talk) 17:33, 30 September 2019 (UTC)