User talk:Wizardman/Archive35

Welcome to the 2011 WikiCup!
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed17 13:01, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK
Thanks for your review of my Al Burris nomination. I've since lengthened the article a little so that it meets the 5x expansion requirement. - PM800 (talk) 21:29, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Superchips article reinstatement
I would propose the reinstatement of the Superchips article as it is an important company in the development of tuning cars. Contrary to the deletion argument put forward elsewhere, the company is reported in many reputable publications such as Autocar, Evo and Auto Express. The company provides ECU upgrades to a wide range of popular vehicles, such as the Ford Focus, Skoda Fabia, BMW 1 Series, Volkswagen Golf and SEAT Ibiza as reported in the following selection of articles. Perhaps the article was in need of an edit rather than deletion?

Warren Whyte (talk) 22:46, 2 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Autocar 20 August 2009
 * Evo May 2006
 * Auto Express November 2009
 * Auto Express September 2005
 * Daily Telegraph Honest John 28 February 2010

GA procedures
I have notice that there is quite a bit of in-breeding in the review of Transport article relating to roads in the United States. Since I have some interest and familiarity with the topic, I have started reviewing such article. A couple of nominators have been very resistant to suggestions to the point of coming across as stuborn. I am now involved in a review of U.S._Route_223 which resulted in Talk:U.S._Route_223/GA1 and Talk:U.S._Route_223/GA2. The content dispute is that I found press coverage quoting Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood calling upon the Congressional delegations from Michigan to South Carolina to include funding for I-73 in the 2011 Transportation Bill. There is also an I-73 Coalition website which lists all of the involved Michigan elected officials. The nominator discounts all of this, and refuses to modify the article. Rather than ask for a second opinion, the nominator failed the nomination and renominated it. I signed up for the reviewer of the second nomination and he again failed it, and manually edited the WP:GAN page. I have raised this at ANI, but it was quickly addressed by an administrator who reviews a lot of his nominations. The entire purpose of GAN is to bring a separate set of eyes to an article. If content disputes can be evaded by procedural hijinks to hide the existence of nominations and "on hold" reviews on the GAN page, the process is doomed to failure. He is also trying to cover up the problem by removing the transclusion of the review from the talk page. Please help. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 08:22, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your response. I obviously don't want to die on my sword over this matter, and it is clear that the nominator does not want to have anything to do with me. What would you suggest that I do: "fail" the second GA nomination and do the edits myself or ask for the second opinion before closing the review? Thanks for your advice. Racepacket (talk) 02:52, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I decided to go the second opinion route, and I hope this will all be resolved soon. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 17:19, 4 January 2011 (UTC)


 * I know that I'm not expected to comment here, but I feel the need to set the record straight on two things. Racepacket is making assumptions in error. I didn't care who picked up the review the second time, as long as he had disengaged from the review process. For him to assume I had a specific editor or class of editors in mind for the second review assumes "facts not in evidence" let alone attempts to assign a false intent to my actions. Second, neither administrator who commented at ANI "review a lot of [my] nominations." The last time either did so was 2008 or 2009.  Imzadi  1979   →  19:48, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:31, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Empire of Brazil FAC is now open!
Empire of Brazil is now a Featured Article candidate. Your opinion (either as support or oppose) is welcome. Here is the page: Featured article candidates/Empire of Brazil/archive1. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 18:54, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

David Yates
Thanks for the note, I've added my thoughts there. J Milburn (talk) 22:04, 5 January 2011 (UTC)

The Land of Green Plums
I saw your note on the talk page and responded there. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 06:00, 6 January 2011 (UTC)

FT write-up for "F and A"?
Hi there, we talked briefly about this a few weeks ago. I wonder whether you might do something for us in the next week or so. The featured sounds write-up is nice, but you wouldn't have to do it that way at all, of course. Tony  (talk)  12:13, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Tucky Guvnas. Oh my heaven. Unlikely to be beaten. Tony   (talk)  02:28, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Wizardman, just checking you'll fling something to us by early Monday east-coast time (or Sunday before you turn in)? Doesn't have to huge. Tony   (talk)  08:47, 8 January 2011 (UTC) PS or it could go into the following week's edition if that suits you better.  Tony   (talk)  10:14, 8 January 2011 (UTC)
 * I've emailed you. Tony   (talk)  13:01, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Steve Collins (American football)
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Featured topic Question
Even though Featured topics has no delegates, I can't think of anyone else to ask this question. Am I allowed to make another FTRC even though I have one up now? GamerPro64 (talk) 00:08, 9 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep. Just helping with getting everything cleaned up. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:54, 9 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Vic Aldridge Giants.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Vic Aldridge Giants.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:22, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for File:Vic Aldridge Cubs.jpg
Thanks for uploading or contributing to File:Vic Aldridge Cubs.jpg. I notice the file page specifies that the file is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the file description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Kelly hi! 19:23, 10 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 06:06, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

As you requested
Per your note, informing you that Halo: Reach just passed GAN. Cheers, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 13:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Stuxnet
Thanks for failing the GA review. I meant to do it earlier, but as my internet access is limited, I forgot about it. -- intelati  talk  23:40, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

59 tiebreaker
It's good, just have to write the Game 2 summary and aftermath, not too much. It's just law school has taken me from Wiki, in particular we're in Moot Court right now which is super intensive. I really want it done before the first round of the Wikicup, so I at least don't post a big fat 0. If I finish it I'll list it at GAN, any chance you'd give it a looksee? Staxringold talkcontribs 00:57, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Hermes o Logios GA
I've done some work on the article. Can you take another look at it? The Utahraptor Talk/Contribs 04:02, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

Attacker class GA
Are you going to be able to respond to the remaining issues for this GA review anytime soon? If not I'll fail it and you can resubmit it once the missing material has been added.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 21:37, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Requiem for a Species
Would be grateful if you could help at Talk:Requiem for a Species/GA1 please... Johnfos (talk) 23:29, 14 January 2011 (UTC)

Rixey
Yea I need as much help as I can right now I'm tied up in a huge buisness deal which takes alot of time. I only have an handful of edits with the other account. I'm planning to expand it once the GA review finish, but it may take until summer or much later. I told you about the account though email months ago, once it's exposed (I'm bad with CLEANSTART because I have the same interests), I'll just ask a developer for my old account back. Secret account 18:05, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 19:48, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Help Maybe?
I saw you work with baseball article and i thought you would maybe be interested in getting 2009 Little League World Series to GA? I know its not Major Leagus Baseball but its an important event in Chula Vista history which im working on expanding the cities coverage for its centennial this year. Spongie555 (talk) 04:19, 21 January 2011 (UTC)

Pirate Metal
Okay, honestly I get confused by some of the Wikipedia editing features, so I may be doing this wrong. Why though do you think Pirate Metal isn't a real subgenre? Just because it is not as popular as some other genres doesn't make it less credible. Please reconsider your thoughts on this subject. :) Anddd think about somehow putting the page back up. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.174.232.54 (talk) 01:55, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors
I saw the quality of your contributions at DYK and clicked on over to your user page and was pretty impressed. Would you be interested in helping with the WP:Online_Ambassadors program? It's really a great opportunity to help university students become Wikipedia contributers. I hope you apply to become an ambassador, Sadads (talk) 16:18, 22 January 2011 (UTC)

Sandy Woodward
Just wondering why you removed the File:Replace this image male.svg from the Sandy Woodward page. Since the person does not have an image attached, I thought that there was suppose to be a placeholder for images. Am I incorrect on this? Please let me know so I can understand how edit pages correctly. Mr Xaero (talk) 05:15, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Categories for discussion nomination of Category:Canadian ice hockey personnel by province or territory
Category:Canadian ice hockey personnel by province or territory, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Mike Selinker (talk) 22:39, 23 January 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:02, 24 January 2011 (UTC)

Request
Hello, I'm just popping by to see if you're busy, if not would you mind reviewing the article Diana Marshall as we're keen to get the ball rolling, and you know from past dealings that we get the corrections and improvements done in a short period of time. Happy editing =) RAIN*the*ONE  BAM 00:51, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually I don't mind waiting for the Diana article to be picked up as she's only 33 in the list. I'd prefer to see some of the older nominations reviewed first. - JuneGloom    Talk  18:45, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:53, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

1959 National League tie-breaker series
Finally finished and listed this article if you're looking for a GAN review project. ;) Staxringold talkcontribs 02:42, 25 January 2011 (UTC)

Acdixon nomination
Hey there. I think I am going to have limited time on the Wiki until at least tomorrow. Any chance you could write up the primary nomination for Acdixon's RFA? NW ( Talk ) 17:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks so much for your very kind words on my RFA nomination. I may have trouble getting in my car later because of the swelling of my head! j/k. I really am honored by your desire, as well as that of other editors, to nominate me for adminship, regardless of what the ultimate outcome of the nomination may be. Since NuclearWarfare expressed interest in writing a co-nomination, I'll wait for him before I transclude to RFA. Thanks again! Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:11, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

File:Bobby Orr Star on Canada's Walk of Fame.jpg
What is the problem with File:Bobby Orr Star on Canada's Walk of Fame.jpg. There seems to be an error on the deletion setup.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:36, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

January 2011
Please do not remove content or templates from pages on Wikipedia without giving a valid reason for the removal in the edit summary. Your content removal does not appear constructive, and has been reverted. Please make use of the sandbox if you'd like to experiment with test edits. Thank you. ''There is no consensus to support your actions of removing image placeholders from articles, and you are advised to stop making such non-constructive edits. '' Dolovis (talk) 16:43, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Since you were involved in the adding and removing of this image on ice hockey articles. You may be interested in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Ice Hockey. -DJSasso (talk) 17:19, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

DJSasso's notification of this discussion to non-ice hockey project members, such as posted here may be considered to be inappropriate canvassing. Dolovis (talk) 17:48, 26 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually it would not, I notified all interested editors. I sent both you and him a link. As such both sides were notified. Secondly, the invitation is neutrally worded which is allowed by WP:CANVASS. I did not push a particular side in my notice. Please start reading some of these guidelines/policies before you throw them around. -DJSasso (talk) 17:51, 26 January 2011 (UTC)

GA Review: Ministry of Foreign Affairs
I've done as you requested, I've fixed all the problems you saw and I've requested a copyedit by the Guild of Copyeditors. Are there any more problems? Should the article wait for the Guild's copyedits or are you going to pass it straight away? --TIAYN (talk) 21:20, 21 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Just so you know, I have performed the requested copyedit. --Slon02 (talk) 01:13, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Typo in Acdixon's RfA
I hate to see an error in an RfA nom of someone I would like to see get the mop, so I thought I'd mention one I noticed in Acdixon's RfA, in case you'd like to fix it. You say the Governors of Kentucky is a Featured Topic; in fact it's a Good Topic (albeit with several featured articles). Mike Christie (talk – library) 01:06, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Government of Kentucky
At one time, I began composing such an article in my user space. It's definitely on my radar. I think I'm going to see how many governors I can get featured to see if it's even possible to get my topic from good to featured, but I do hope to get back to that article one day. Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 18:21, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Sock roaming in FAC
Dear Wizardman, I don't know whether you know me, hello I'm Legolas. I came here after seeing this edit of yours. My question is, what can we do about this disruptive alternate account? — Legolas ( talk 2 me ) 16:33, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Alan Durst article
Back in July 2010 you added a tag to the article I had written on Alan Durst to the effect that you considered it an orphan.

I have added several links/references and wonder whether it would be in order for me now to remove the "orphan" tag.

Weglinde (talk) 17:18, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

FAC
I'm pretty uncomfortable with this. There is definitely an argument that the user is violating WP:POINT, but there is also an argument that he is leaving his feedback on the FAC. Whether it is actionable is up to the FAC delegates to decide, and whether he gets to participate at FAC is for the community to decide. Simply removing the comment doesn't seem kosher to me, and there is little precedent for even the most ridiculous comments being removed wholesale. -- Andy Walsh  (talk)  18:54, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

Randall Cunningham undo
Although Randall Cunningham did punt once in the NFL, and it bounced for a record 91 yards, he was not a punter, and listing that as his position next to quarterback is not only misleading but inaccurate. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Let14intohof (talk • contribs) 13:55, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Reds
Thanks for the poke. I'll get the names replaced and move it back this weekend, but a decent bit of that was still the Cubs list as a template, so I've put it back in userspace for now. Courcelles 18:17, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Michael Aquino and Other Notable Satanists
I have a library of citations I can use to support the construction of pages on those who are notable Satanists and I'd like to start with one of the most obvious: Michael Aquino. you mentioned on my UserTalk page that you were aware that the Aquino page had been deleted because the previous discussions were insufficiently substantiated as regard Notability and said that if "new sources" were found then it'd be worth renewing that page. I don't know what those previous discussions included or where they might be located so as to evaluate whether what i am referring to is a 'new source'.

here is the text from that interaction to which you never responded (and never responded in August to my post here about the same thing):


 * very glad to hear that, Wizardman. since i have no link to the discussion prior then i cannot ascertain what would be "newfound" references. I have a great number of them, including Gordon Melton, Arthur Lyons, James R. Lewis and others who count Michael Aquino and his Temple of Set as worthy of coverage as a micro-Luther to the CoS Roman Catholics. how would you like me to offer up these references to you? I would think these kinds of things would be all over the internet as well, but i know that wiki has a higher standard of authentication.-- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 00:48, 15 August 2010 (UTC)

please direct me to a spot which will have this discussion or indicate to me whether any of the sources that i mentioned in my UserTalk page response are new to you. thank you. -- self-ref (nagasiva yronwode) (talk) 15:54, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Simon Connolly AFD
Articles for deletion/Simon Connolly had a second article added to the nomination, Meera Thavasothy. Was there sufficient discussion of this article for it to be deleted, or is a separate AFD needed? January  (talk)  16:45, 30 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: Poke
Thanks for checking up on me. I gave up on editing for the longest time shortly after Featured Topic requirements changed. I had spent two years working on a big collection of articles for a featured topic, and shortly after I managed to get it featured, the requirements were raised and it was delisted. That was really discouraging, and I haven't edited much as a result. I'm trying to convince myself to begin editing again, but it isn't an easy process. JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:36, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Topic
Hello

Featured topics/Star Wars episodes - it should be still Good Topic ? PMG (talk) 05:17, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

Re: GA
Yes, I just keep forgetting about it and I've been so busy with exams and other things. I will review it after my exam this morning. ℥nding · start 12:02, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

RE:FYI
Yea, I noticed it a bit lately. Thanks though. And sorry for my ignorance! :P --Gaius Claudius Nero (talk) 17:05, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

2009 World Series
This is serious wiki-stalking, but I noticed you added the potential 09 World Series FAC to your 2011 to-do list. Do you think it's worth another go (or maybe a PR run through)? It went through FAC but largely just didn't draw many comments beyond the initial people (and I feel I dealt with their issues). What do you think? Staxringold talkcontribs 18:33, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 January newsletter
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to, who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by , with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to, who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, , who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!

A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 22:46, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

William Blackstone
Despite my best efforts, I can't find anything to fault in this article relating to the Good Article criteria. Therefore the article has been promoted to Good Article. Congratulations! - DustFormsWords (talk) 23:14, 31 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:50, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Bobby Borg
You deleted my page. I was the Drummer for Warrant, Beggars & Thieves, and Left For Dead. These bands are all internationally known bands and still sell records. Further, I am a best selling author in the area of music business and speak all over the country at major institutions. I teach at UCLA and MI and my articles are all over the Web. How can I get a page back up? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.179.233 (talk) 04:05, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback
Hey there, Just curious why you deleted the Bobby Borg page. I was the drummer in a few major label bands that are still selling, I have a book out with random house that is selling, and I an a writer with 1000s of published articles. Please explain. Thank you. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.208.179.233 (talk) 03:56, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Talk:John F. Tierney/GA1
Hi, I think I got them all. —Designate (talk) 02:27, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review. —Designate (talk) 04:32, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Editor assistance list
A problem has been identified at Editor assistance/list. You may like to read Wikipedia talk:Editor assistance/list. JamesBWatson (talk) 11:30, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Marli Harwood / Buck
Hello there. I wanted to get in touch as you recently deleted an entry by Marli Harwood. There was some serious misunderstanding by the artist herself about the rules & regulations of wiki. I look after her online publicity and would like to create a new wiki which follows all guide lines. I can assure you that there will be no further edits by the artist herself and will read well & be relevant. She is notable as is currently record of the week on Radio 2 in the UK. Any help you can give me on this would be very helpful. Best wishes Doug Hall — Preceding unsigned comment added by Dougweasalmanhall (talk • contribs) 16:35, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Just follow up on previous message. Wizardman - could you please respond? you can contact me on my email doughall@pprpublicity.com or through my talk page. Best wishes Doug Hall --Dougweasalmanhall (talk) 16:47, 7 February 2011 (UTC)Doug Hall

Talk:Madden NFL
Hey WM. Not sure what happened here, but just wanted to let you know that it was not an intentional edit (nor do I even remember making it).  ArcAngel    (talk) ) 18:34, 6 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:23, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Your recent speedy deletions
Schools have long been exempt from CSD A7. Has something changed that I am not aware of? Paul Erik (talk) (contribs) 18:37, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

As far as I'm aware, seeing as the CSD A7 page still says that schools are exempt (regardless of current or past discussions going on regarding schools and their exemption), these speedy deletions should not be taking place. Until/Unless the discussions end in a change to the speedy deletino criteria, you're going against them by deleting the pages and shouldn't be. Just sticking my oar in. Jim (talk) 15:11, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
 * As the article concerned was promptly recreated, the discussion is now merely academic (pun intended). LordVetinari (talk) 12:41, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Since that article actually looks nice now, I have no problem with the recreation. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 16:43, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Added template for SuggestBot
Hi,

Thanks for being one of SuggestBot's users! I hope you have found the bot's suggestions useful.

We are in the process of switching from our previous list-based signup process to using templates and userboxes, and I have therefore added the appropriate template to your user talk page. You should receive the first set of suggestions within a day, and since we'll be automating SuggestBot you will from then on continue to receive them regularly at the desired frequency.

We now also have a userbox that you can use to let others know you're using SuggestBot, and if you don't want to clutter your user talk page the bot can post to a sub-page in your userspace. More information about the userbox and usage of the template is available on User:SuggestBot/Getting Recommendations Regularly.

If there are any questions, please don't hesitate to get in touch with me on my user talk page. Thanks again, Nettrom (talk) 16:22, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 14:57, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Evesham
Hi Wizardman. I know there has been little action on this GA. Unfortunately RL got  in  the way  of the two  major editors for a couple of weeks. These things happen - some of us do  occasionally have things that  put  us in  hospital, then send us to supervise educational  projects in  deepest untamed Asia. Wiki is voluntary  part-time work, and many  of us do  our best as regular Wikipedians. It is unfortunate that Dana now wants to fail the GA on the basis of making it  appear  as if it were abandoned because of the discovery  of two or three cases of three or four word paraphrasing, which  she herself appears to admit in  a later discussion  with  Gyromagician  were not  quite so  serious after all. Neither I nor Gyro are the kind of editors who have any  interest whatsoever in  faking  an article through GA, and neither of us are obsessed with  collecting  green blobs or bronze stars. We are not the original  authors of the article, and when we checked it  through, we assumed that  another member of the team had checked through  all  the references. Later, there was a misunderstanding as to  who  would reorder the chronological  sequence of the history  parts,  and more time was lost. We know Dana to  be a strict  reviewer, and that's one of the very  reasons she was invited to  do  this review. I can address the points she is making, but  I  cannot  do  much  until I have a stable Internet  connection at the end of this week. All I can do at the moment is stab-and-dab editing. Regards, --Kudpung (talk) 19:50, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:46, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Shakib al Hasan
That's no problem, I should be able to do it in the next two days. Do you want me to take over completely or do you want to do the passing/failing? --Sarastro1 (talk) 08:28, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Suggestion regarding you AWB edits
Although I personally agree with the changes you made to Talk:Jim E. Mora I wanted to warn you that I just had my AWB access removed and the debate is ongoing at ANI for doing much more than that because the changes didn't change anything to the rendering of the page. I just wanted to let you know so that someone doesn't do the same to you. --Kumioko (talk) 17:23, 18 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Kumioko, not exactly. This edit assessed the page in a wikiproject. -- Magioladitis (talk) 01:24, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * But he was cleansing redirects which is one of the things that folks have mentioned repeatedly on my ANI notice. Like I said I agree with the edits I just wanted to warn him so he didn't fall into the same gray area trap I did. --Kumioko (talk) 01:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of List of Baltimore Orioles first-round draft picks
Hello! Your submission of List of Baltimore Orioles first-round draft picks at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  十  八  09:34, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
Whoot! You rock! I will make wrapping up those final few a priority, hopefully for completion today. Weekends are unpredictable for me, but getting one of those off the list is always a fabulous feeling. Thank you so much for helping out in that department. You are sorely needed and much appreciated. :) --Moonriddengirl (talk) 13:18, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

Heiro talkback
 He  iro 05:03, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 18:45, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

The February 2011 Wikification Backlog Elimination Drive Needs Your Help!
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 04:25, 24 February 2011 (UTC).

DYK for List of Baltimore Orioles first-round draft picks
The DYK project (nominate) 06:03, 24 February 2011 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/2009 World Series/archive3
Alrighty, with the 2nd PR completed and the last FAC more than half a year ago, taking another shot. Staxringold talkcontribs 16:50, 19 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Cleaned up your issues, thanks! Staxringold talkcontribs 13:36, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 10:47, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:
Thanks. I always keep forgetting about that. I'll remember to do it next time. ℥nding · start 20:27, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

First-round MLB lists
Four left. If there's no objection, I'll take my local team and do Atlanta. --Courcelles 00:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Any idea who's going to do the two biggies (Oakland and San Fran)? Courcelles 02:30, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good. Would be nice to have this topic wrapped up (or at least in the FLC backlog) before the season starts. Courcelles 17:50, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry, stalked this discussion b/c Wiz's talk page is on my watchlist. I'll take.... Oakland lets say, sound good? Have a week of Spring Break coming up, I should be able to knock it out then whether or not the FAC is done. Staxringold talkcontribs 14:36, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
 * Good. I'll produce the table for the Giants over the next week, though I might have to dump the production of prose and shepherding through FLC off on one of y'all if things go pear-shaped given.

March 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
Hi. On behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors, I am inviting you to sign up for our March Backlog Elimination Drive. Win a barnstar! It's fun. -- Diannaa (Talk) 01:55, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

FAC for 2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl
Hello. I was wondering, if you had some free time, if you could take a look at the currently-open FAC for 2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl. Your comments have been very helpful in the past and I would appreciate your feedback. –Grondemar 13:15, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter
So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to (first, with 487 points) and  (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:53, 28 February 2011 (UTC)