User talk:Wizardman/Archive36

The Signpost: 28 February 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:03, 1 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey Wizardman!!!!!!!!,,, why did you do this? You do realize hockey is religion up here in MN and you have just removed the source of our valuable information. Any way to restore this? ---16:56, 14 January 2011 Wizardman (talk | contribs) deleted "Minnesota high school boys hockey results" ‎ (Expired PROD, concern was: Non-notable highschool ice hockey results. WP:NOTSTATS)- —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.161.16.114 (talk)

Steph
Wizardman, I added comments on the last 2 sections at Talk:Steph Cunningham/GA1 on 1 Mar. I also gave some advice at User_talk:Philcha. RaintheOne and I agreed on a 2nd opinion on 22 Feb 2011, but none appeared. IMO the article is presently well below GA standard. Why have you nullified Talk:Steph Cunningham/GA1? For a contrast, Homer the Moe was well prepared for a GA review, my comments at Talk:Homer the Moe/GA1 took 2 to 2.5 hours, and the nominator is working through them (slowly, I guess for RL reasons, but that article also waited about 3 months in the queue). --Philcha (talk) 08:27, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I've also just seem that another editor has edited the article (probably good) and commented on this at Talk:Steph Cunningham/GA1. --Philcha (talk) 08:43, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Homer the moe is a short article, tv episode with less coverage, so not as much content to review. Frickative agreed to help me cut down the plot section, right down infact. You know these things take time in the GAN cue. RAIN*the*ONE  BAM 13:47, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Since a second opinion was requested, I moved the counter to the second review to get it; no one seems to tackle second opinions anymore, and moving it over would have fixed it. Plus, it may help get the review wrapped up quicker one way or the other. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 13:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Why have you changed it back then? Philcha is trying to lock me into this review. RAIN*the*ONE  BAM 14:05, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * This review is likely stuck between a rock and a hard place. On the one hand, if most of the issues are addressed and a second opinion requested, then a fresh set of eyes would be beneficial. On the other hand, there are comments being added that are helpful, even if some are overkill. At 19kb of prose I don't think an axe has to be taken to the article though, it's not overly long. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 14:11, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * My concern is that I'm being told to remove everything. Everything every single other GA article has on a similiar subject. RAIN*the*ONE  BAM 14:38, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * The mass removals of text that seem to be proposed I disagree with as well, though Frickative's modifications have helped the article. The best bet will probably be to see if he can strike a balance and make both you and Philcha happy with the article in the end. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 15:25, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

GA process
Hi Wizardman! I have noticed your little help in Talk:Ante Pavelić/GA1. Can you check it again since this was my first GA Review. Unfortunately, I have failed the article. If you agree, could you add that notice on the article's talk page, or should I try to do it myself...--Kebeta (talk) 15:09, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and did that; all that's needed is to change the template on the talk page as I did when an article's failed. I agree with the failing as well, since it should have been copyedited before being nominated if that was actually a problem. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 15:26, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Well the main reason was that large sections/paragraphs were unreferenced. Thanks for help. --Kebeta (talk) 17:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Articles for deletion/List of bus routes in Downham Market
Can I ask you to look again at this deletion discussion please as your closing comment suggests you might not have understood the arguments people were making. The arguments for deletion were all either "this is a travel directory", countered by evidence that it is nothing like a travel directory; or "lists of bus routes are never acceptable" which not only is incorrect (evidenced by the other lists and deletion discussions) but (as I pointed out in the discussion) offer no reason why this list of bus routes is different to the ones that have been kept. At no point was Downham Market compared with Brooklyn or London.

While there may have been no strong reasons given to keep (unless you count it being useful encyclopaedic information), but crucially there was no actual reason given to delete this article, just general statements about general classes of articles. Thryduulf (talk) 09:04, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually no, the burden of proof is always* on those who want to change the status quo. In an AfD discussion this means that those wanting to delete need to show that it should be deleted and no consensus defaults to keep. Here those wanting to keep said "this is encyclopaedic" those wanting to delete said "such lists are never encyclopaedic", which those wishing to keep showed was incorrect. *Except regarding copyright where there is a lower standard required, but that is not relevant here. Thryduulf (talk) 10:10, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of Chinnu Senthilkumar
Dear Wizardman,

I notice that Wikipage for "Chinnu Senthilkumar" was deleted. There was a mention that "Young Scientist" award is cited as the reason, because you couldn't find anything in Anna University. Yes, this award was given to students of graduating from that year. I passed out from Anna University in 1991.

Is there anything I need to do re-post the wiki link for Chinnu Senthilkumar? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 122.172.17.230 (talk) 14:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Bill Stein
Just so you know I'm gonna finally clear this badboy out of GAN (it's the oldest unreviewed nom currently). You left a note that you'd deal with things since Brian is/was inactive. Staxringold talkcontribs 15:02, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Quick fail, or not?
Hey Wizardman. Since you are one of the GAN backlog drive coordinators, I thought you could weigh in on something. and I have a bit of a disagreement over whether his review of The Incredible Melting Man is a quick-fail or a fail, and thus whether he can count it toward his progress. We voiced our comments on Good article reassessment/The Incredible Melting Man/1 and each other's talk pages, but don't seem to agree. Just wanted to hear what you thought. (I'm not asking you to weigh in on the GAR if you don't want to, just the quick-fail issue.) Thanks! And thanks for coordinating another backlog drive, looks like it's off to a good start! I moved into my new house this week and only have limited Internet access at work, but I hope to help out more when I get my Net set up... —  Hun ter   Ka  hn  21:39, 4 March 2011 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your help with this, Wizardman. Further review comments at the article reassessment would be welcome. Also, on another matter, I would like to draw your attention to Talk:David Yates/GA2: if you have any comments on the article, please feel free to add them to the review page. Thanks again, Geometry guy 20:18, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Optional?
Hi Wizardman. I notice you're removing the "optional" from RfA participants' questions, including mine. I don't particularly care whether they're labeled "optional" or not, but it might save you time to just change it at the source (Template:Rfa-question) rather than individually for each question. Best, 28bytes (talk) 16:42, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Greg Goossen
Thank you Victuallers (talk) 02:04, 7 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 15:36, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiProject Wikify's March Mini Drive
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of WikiProject Wikify at 04:19, 9 March 2011 (UTC).

can you change a delete into a redirect?
Monarch (The Venture Bros.) ended in delete of course. I would ask it be made into a redirect instead. Some of the history might be valid in the main Venture Bros article. Also, I want to be able to export the entire history of it, using http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Special:Export so I can import it to the Wikia dedicated to this series. I already exported all the other articles that are up for deletion now, or will certainly be in the future. I want to preserve this one also.  D r e a m Focus  00:07, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK
With reference to your green tick regarding the HMS Petard entry of 28 Feb on the DYK page - thanks. RASAM (talk) 15:04, 10 March 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) 10:45, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Action at Néry
Thanks for the note!

I originally listed it as a GAN but pulled it; there's one major hole (lack of recent coverage in the aftermath) which I want to rectify before putting it up for review - I know the book I need to track down, it's just remembering to get around to it that's the issue... Shimgray | talk | 11:35, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Legolas's GA
I would've but it seems like somebody got there first =D--Blackjacks101 (talk) 12:48, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK? question
Hey there, I'm asking you this because you're the only admin on the list of DYK people that I've spoken with before, I think. I just successfully nominated my first DYK, but I was concerned about how to indicate that it was my first. I'm totally new to the DYK process, and don't feel comfortable vetting any other nominations just yet. Thanks for your help. —Torchiest talkedits 01:07, 13 March 2011 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster (E)/archive1
Hi Wizardman, can you comment on the 3b concerns raised in the above FLC (which you supported)? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:18, 14 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:06, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi
Can you quickly revisit here before the hook passes through? I just saw the objections today when I decided to check on it, and agree somewhat with some of the concerns, so provided another alternate wording. If you agree with it, substitute it as the new final wording.

Also, if the advertising thing is a concern, then the one reserved for March 19 also needs addressing because it's advertising the release of a product premiere of a show, which is moreso advertising than a show hook IMO. That's just my feeling however. =) CycloneGU (talk) 05:15, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Need help
My recently approved GA (There's More Than One of Everything) is being "reassessed" because LauraHale feels it is not up to snuff. However, there are no issues with the article, and I feel the original GA approval was well-deserved! First her complaint was that the plot section wasn't cited (I don't think she's ever read an episode article in her life, or she would have been aware of Manual of Style (television)). Now her problems with the article are petty sourcing issues, like complaining that Roberto Orci is called a co-creator, when this is not directly in the source provided. She even complained that I said the film Star Trek was from 2009, when the source failed to say the exact year! Basically, she wants EVERY tiny, common bit of information cited, regardless of their importance or obviousness. As I know you are very involved in the GA project, could you please step in and review her "suggestions"? I don't feel they help the article at all, or the overall Wikipedia project. Thanks, Ruby2010   talk  15:57, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

ROB
Hi

You edited the talk page banners on Talk:R.O.B. and removed "attention=no" from the robotics banner.

Can I ask why you did this?

Thanks Chaosdruid (talk) 05:37, 16 March 2011 (UTC)


 * A fair point, however a no does not mean it will not be used. We are about to start the next phase of our push to get articles assessed properly and the next stage will be to see which articles need working on. I thought that the only issues raised were with fields with nothing after the =.
 * This one should have been set to yes though, as you can see I have re-added it and put the relevant points in to the talk page. Chaosdruid (talk) 05:50, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

Failing a GTC
I'm failing a GTC because it was withdrawn by the nominator and I'm a little confused about updating the article history as there's nothing there specifically for a failed GTC, just for FTC and I can't find any article history notes in a couple of failed GTCs. Is the update really only for FTCs?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 04:16, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Andrew Davis Bruce
Congratulations, the article has passed GAN. If you wish to take it to A class, it will need some expansion. Also, I renamed the article. Cheers. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:45, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Thomas
I would do a bit of research on that, but yes he probably didn't get a ring. Either way I'd mention his presence in 05, even if he didn't win. Staxringold talkcontribs 12:08, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

FLC review
You have reviewed Philadelphia Phillies all-time roster (E) at WP:FLC. Demands by opposers at that nomination have resulted in a merge. I am asking all commenters to return to the FLC page and re-review if time is available. I appreciate your help and apologize for the inconvenience this has caused you. &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  22:34, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

2009 World Series
Dunno if you were following, but she's finally gotten promoted! Woot woot. Thanks for the nudge to take another shot at FAC. Staxringold talkcontribs 03:44, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

Assessment?
Hi. You originally assessed Ryan Kalish for baseball. If you have the time and the inclination, might you take a look at it now to see whether in your view it qualifies for a higher assessment? I've put some work into it, and believe that it will very likely warrant a much higher assessment. Tx. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 14:13, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Many thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 15:07, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:56, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

No Pressure
Hey Wizard. I saw the comment you made on No Pressure's GA review. I don't know how to make a subpage. Do you know how? GamerPro64 (talk) 19:10, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Harley J. Earl Trophy
The comments on the GAN review has been addressed properly. -- Nascar 1996  (talk • contribs) 03:47, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

GA nomination
I have nominated "Rajinikanth" article for GA and iw yet to be reviewed.Artedit (talk) 08:03, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of highest paid Major League Baseball players/archive1
I'm nearly done implementing the salary progression table you requested here at the FLC! Still needs some refs (working on it), but any style comments can be addressed whenever you have the time. Thanks! Staxringold talkcontribs 20:08, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Just a note, the table is fully implemented, would love your view on it! Staxringold talkcontribs 21:31, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Priority parameter in bio tag
I see you adding bio banner tags. Egads, you are probably the only 5-6 people who actually fill in listas. Thank You, that makes my life easier. The "priority" parameter is no more in the bio banner. It has been replaced with work group priority parameters.... sports-priority=, a&e-priority=, politician-priority=, etc.... The way they keep changing things, something else has probably changed while I write this. Bgwhite (talk) 20:11, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:1869 Atlantic hurricane season/GA1
Hey, sorry to bother you, when I see you're under a fair bit of Wiki-stress. You said you'd do it shortly, and not that I'm impatient, but I was just hoping you didn't forget about that GAR. Cheers! --♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 00:56, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Kellee Santiago
Hey, I've addressed your concerns about the article and it's ready for another look. Thanks for reviewing! -- Pres N  05:27, 25 March 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) 11:17, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Marouane Chamakh GA Review
What is the situation with the Marouane Chamakh review? Adam hasn't been around since he made his last edit regarding the review. Later.  –J10S   Talk 21:58, 26 March 2011 (UTC)

Re:List of Matoran's Delete
Is there any way that I can view the history of the article without restoring it? --67.80.27.38 (talk) 20:08, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

FT Question
How do you close reviews at WP:FTC? GamerPro64 (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 March 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:02, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Keith Aulie
Thank you for your time with the Keith Aulie review. I appreciate you stepping in to help out. Canada Hky (talk) 03:26, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Re:Talk:Scream (Kelis song)/GA1
I wouldn't have an objection to you taking over if you feel up to it. The author and I appear to disagree on precisely what GAC is for- I'm not happy to just rubber-stamp an article that seems to me to be somewhat lacking. Thanks for keeping an eye on this; I've had multiple negative experiences reviewing pop music articles, and I don't think it's a surprise that there is usually a backlog there. J Milburn (talk) 23:07, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Strange tweakings
Hi there, are you able to explain your reasons for the three edits you made labelled "tweak" (ie this one), where you changed the dates of the BLP unsourced tags from Feb 2009 to April 2010? WP:URBLP and WP:URBLPR have both slowed down recently, so we don't need distractions like that. The-Pope (talk) 07:13, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 March newsletter
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is with 231 points, who leads Pool H.  (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see WikiCup/Scoring.

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 three 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 01:12, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive


On behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, we would like to take the time and thank you for your contributions made as part of the March 2011 Good articles backlog elimination drive. Awards and barnstars will go out shortly for those who have reviewed a certain number of articles.

During the backlog drive, in the month of March 2011,
 * 522 GA nominations were undertaken.
 * 423 GA nominations passed.
 * 72 GA nominations failed.
 * 27 GA nominations were on hold.

We started the GA backlog elimination drive with 378 GA nominations remaining, with 291 that were not reviewed at all. By 2:00, April 1, 2011, the backlog was at 171 GA nominations, with 100 that were left unreviewed.

At the start of the drive, the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 101 days (Andrei Kirilenko (politician), at 20 November 2010, reviewed and passed 1 March 2011); at the end of the drive the oldest unreviewed GA nomination was 39 days (Gery Chico, at 24 February 2011, still yet to be reviewed as of this posting).

While we did not achieve the objective of getting the backlog of outstanding GA nominations down to below 50, we reduced the GA backlog by over half. The GA reviews also seemed to be of a higher quality and have consistently led, to say the least, to marginal improvements to those articles (although there were significant improvements to many, even on the some of the nominations that were failed).

If you would like to comment on the drive itself and maybe even make suggestions on how to improve the next one, please make a comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/March 2011. Another GA backlog elimination drive is being planned for later this year, tentatively for September or October 2011. Also, if you have any comments or remarks on how to improve the Good article process in general, WikiProject Good articles can always use some feedback at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles.

Again, on behalf of User:Wizardman and myself, thank you for making the March 2011 GA backlog elimination drive a success.

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:54, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for List of Chicago White Sox first-round draft picks
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 9 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 April 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 10:42, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

April fools?
Is this an April fools joke? GamerPro64 (talk) 16:59, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Actually, no. Ironically, the joke is that I knew people would assume it's a joke so I would be able to retire quietly. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 03:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, now. Not really retired now are ya? GamerPro64 (talk) 03:11, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks like a no for now. I'll tackle the FTC backlog tomorrow and friday, since I cast aside everything else i did on here the backlog could be gone fast. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 03:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh no, don't worry about FT. I asked User talk:Sturmvogel 66 if he can work with some of the reviews yesterday and he said yes. But you still work on it if you want. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:25, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

NOOO
Wiz!!! Staxringold talkcontribs 21:07, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I might be back someday, so I'll let you know if I am. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 03:21, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Can I just say I'm really mad at you and leave it at that? :-) Just kidding. Hope to see you around sometime, and have a great break or retirement. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:40, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Same here, but remember that you can always be back to finish the Big Bear Operation. Nergaal (talk) 03:58, 6 April 2011 (UTC)
 * You deserve a good break. Please come back soon though; I for one have always appreciated your quiet contributions to the encyclopedia. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:52, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

1N540X
Since the content was all merged, all you had to do was make a direct, or let us, and a bot would have taken care of all the double redirects. By deleting the article and all the redirects to it, you just made me recreate them all as new redirects. Why go the hard way like that instead of going with what was obviously going to be OK? Dicklyon (talk) 03:18, 14 April 2011 (UTC)


 * Please reconsider your close of Articles for deletion/1N5401 and Articles for deletion/1N540X. Considerations include:
 * 1) There was no clear consensus for deletion.
 * 2) The delete camp included editors who seem to participate in AFD discussion purely to oppose me, per WP:HARASS.
 * 3) User:Yaksar !voted to delete twice in Articles for deletion/1N540X
 * 4) I added well-sourced content during the discussion but no account seems to have been taken of this.
 * 5) User:Dicklyon still wishes to use this content per User_talk:Colonel_Warden.  Reuse of the material requires proper attribution per the WP:GFDL. Colonel Warden (talk) 06:14, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * The content was all merged before the close, and there was very little of it, and all is OK now as far as I'm concern, but if someone wants to make the history more accurate, that's OK with me, too. Dicklyon (talk) 15:08, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I could look through the delete history and put the redirects back up if that's an issue. I re-read the AFD and I certainly don't see a consensus to keep, though I could've redirected instead so as not to ruffle feathers; that's how it is now though. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 21:40, 14 April 2011 (UTC)

I suppose ...
... that this would be a bad time to ask if you miss arbitrating. :)

Thanks for everything you've done around here, and I hope and expect to see you around some more in the future; but feel free to remember always that real-life commitments come first. Regards, Newyorkbrad (talk) 02:10, 16 April 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) 08:24, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Nomination of Theresa M. Kelly for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Theresa M. Kelly is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Theresa M. Kelly until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on good quality evidence, and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Shannon Rose Talk 17:19, 17 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 07:03, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

Tiny thing
Could you review Featured list candidates/List of highest paid Major League Baseball players/archive1 and see if the table I've added satisfies your comment (and if it does maybe cap the comment)? The nomination sat for a long time before anyone else added reviews (Courcelles just stepped in) I'm afraid that what looked like an unfinished discussion scared away reviews. Thanks! Staxringold talkcontribs 19:57, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion of KKS Power Plant Classification System
Hello Wizardman, could you review the deletion of the entry KKS Power Plan Cassification system. The wikipedia traffic statistics show about 3000 views per day till deletion. Furthermore the artical relates to a VGB-regultion, which comes very close to an international standard. This together should be enough reason to put the artical back to wikipedia. The discussion I have seen on the deletion does not cover these facts. Egdir (talk) 21:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * While nice, having 3000 views in a month (not per day) is not a rationale one way or the other that can be used for the deletion process. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 01:00, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Machinery Hall
hey is there any way I could get an archive of the Machinery Hall article you deleted, I found it interesting. 21:17, 22 April 2011 sheafromme (talk) 21:18, 22 April 2011 (UTC)

List of sources about claims that Vojsava Kastrioti was Slav
I would like to apply for deletion review of the article List of sources about claims that Vojsava Kastrioti was Slav because I think the closer interpreted the debate incorrectly.

Before I do it I have to follow Wikipedia:Deletion_review#Instructions and to discuss the matter with the deleting administrator and try to resolve it with him or her first.

Please take a second look after reading my comment User:Antidiskriminator/Drafts of articles/AfD Complain and let me know your opinion about my arguments. Thanks in advance.

--Antidiskriminator (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Before I proceed with this issue, please be so kind and have a third thought about it, having in mind the following instructions of Arguments to avoid in deletion discussions: "It is important to keep in mind that the AfD process is designed to solicit discussion, not votes."
 * Will you please be so kind to have a third thought about it and, before you give me your final opinion try to answer one simple question (without taking in consideration simple votes but arguments about policies violated by the existence of this article brought in AfD discussion):
 * Why did you delete this article?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 07:50, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

Deletion review for List of sources about claims that Vojsava Kastrioti was Slav
An editor has asked for a deletion review of List of sources about claims that Vojsava Kastrioti was Slav. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:27, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Consensus is ultimately determined by the quality of the arguments given for and against an issue, as viewed through the lens of Wikipedia policy, not by a simple counted majority.
 * I am sorry, but that does not answer my question. My question was: taking in consideration ...arguments about policies violated by the existence of this article brought in AfD discussion:Why did you delete this article? --Antidiskriminator (talk) 16:49, 23 April 2011 (UTC)

WP:NoQuorum
FYI, I think that The Caged (band) and Suha Çalkıvik should have been closed as "soft delete" as per WP:NOQUORUM and hope that you will consider "soft delete" going forward. Thanks, Unscintillating (talk) 23:15, 23 April 2011 (UTC)
 * I generally tend to agree. The 2 admins I know who close "1 voters" will usually restore the articles and reopen the AFD on a good faith request. However, as an unsourced BLP, Suha Çalkıvik should stay deleted. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 12:58, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

Transylvania Television Page deletion
Hello Wizardman,

My name is Tina Ketola and I am production assistant contacting you on behalf of the *Transylvania Television* show. Clarke Stone, a producer for *Transylvania Television* http://www.transylvania-tv.com/about-2/ can verify that I am acting on behalf of the show on this issue.

I am writing to ask if we can get this page un-deleted and then some time and guidance (or direction - point us to a TV wiki page that follows approved standards) on bringing this wiki page up to standards. I thought I would start with you, per the instructions on the deletion, before starting a formal deletion review.

The show *Transylvania Television* has been getting attention in the media and is currently working on shooting new content for Television broadcast this fall. If you can un-delete this page, attention will be brought immediately to bear on updating page content to standard.

Thanks, and regards, ElationTalk (talk) 19:45, 25 April 2011 (UTC) ElationTalk - Tina Ketola

Purgatory Correctional Facility
Hello - I just finished expanding this article. Any chance of checking it once more and restoring the nom? Verne Equinox (talk) 01:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 April 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:47, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Transylvania Television Page - re-in-statement request
Hello again,

Thanks for your response/addition to MelanieN's response to my request for re-in-statement for the Transylvania Television page. Here are some more 3rd party citations, that I hope will help in this quest. Please pardon my newb-ness to wiki, I'm learning here and appreciate your patience.

Clearly more information (and attention - I just got put on this quest, on behalf of *Transylvania Television* post-deletion of the page) is needed on the page and if you could re-instate the page, I could get these citations and background information on key *Transylvania Television" (*TVTV*) creative forces and media notice added to the page:

Gordon Smuder, co-creator of *TVTV*, film industry professional - imdb http://www.imdb.com/name/nm2558181/

Michael Heagle, co-creator of *TVTV*, a film industry professional - imdb http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0372212/filmotype

Charles Hubbell, lead actor - imdb http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0399251/

MN examiner article ( a blacklisted site, so I am breaking up the url) http://www. examiner. com/ independent-film-in-minneapolis/yeti-and-zombies-and-vampires-oh-my

USA Today blog article http://content.usatoday.com/communities/popcandy/post/2010/08/puppets-and-vampires-collide-on-transylvania-television/1

Atom.com (comedy central online) "shout out" http://www.atom.com/blog/2011/01/12/transylvania-tv/

Drinking with Ian (http://www.drinkingwithian.com/), a popular Minneapolis cable access television show, featured *TVTV* characters Furry and Batfink and their puppeteers Gordon Smuder and Lazlo Nemesi. Advance to about 8:30 in the clip to get to the *TVTV* portion http://blip.tv/file/4102965

Also, the MN film board did a documentary on *TVTV*, I am trying to locate that link, will have it for you shortly.

Is this enough to get us started on re-in-statement, so we can then go edit the wiki page appropriately, and bring it up to standard (meaning - have appropriate, noteworthy content/citations)?

Thank you for your help and attention in this matter, it is greatly appreciated

ElationTalk (talk) 05:01, 26 April 2011 (UTC) ElationTalk - Tina Ketola

Re:Wikicup
I've added you back in- good to have you back! J Milburn (talk) 15:20, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

Request to userfy Phyrexia
As I articulate here, I would like to have the deleted article put into my userspace for improvement. Cool Hand Luke 16:44, 26 April 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 April newsletter
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. , who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.

This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to and  who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!

Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims 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 19:34, 29 April 2011 (UTC)