User talk:Wizardman/Archive38

Killebrew under oath
Do you know the story behind Killebrew being under oath? As a reader, I'm somewhat left wondering what that was about. Wknight94 talk 13:10, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I guess it's "the specifics I couldn't find" part that's eating at me. It's almost like a cliffhanger that never gets answered - was he suing someone?  was he in trouble for something?  was his brother a psycho killer?  etc...  But, if there is no answer to be found, then c'est la vie.  Wknight94 talk 16:11, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Fantastic, great to hear it! Now I'll be able to sleep tonight.  ;)  Wknight94 talk 16:22, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

RE: FT Quandary
Well, seeing this commonly happening to the video game topics (mainly the Chrono titles topic), I think that we should start a 3 month retention period for FF12. GamerPro64 20:21, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive invitation
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 09:35, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Re: Courtesy note
Thanks for letting me know! I'll discuss it with the Square Enix WikiProject, but if it's now officially cancelled I'm not sure that the article will be able to meet the notability guide, so the problem might just go away. -- Pres N  04:31, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
 * We agreed to merge the article to the developers page, so I've gone ahead and removed it from the retention listing. I've also brought up the Chrono Titles retention period with WP:SE. -- Pres N  18:28, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Wizardman
I'd just gotten your email and logged in to see that you've already made the changes. Here's a barnstar for your effort! I've been inactive for a bit because I'm doing research for a new book on the Cuban Missile Crisis and haven't had much time for Wikipedia lately, but I'm glad to see you rescinded your retirement. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:16, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

A question
Since all of my GTCs haven't passed, I thought it'd be best to run this by someone more familiar with FTs/GTs:

I plan to start a new project, this:

I thought of this in mind for a FT (or just GT) but, after looking at the media sections of both, it does not seem like there are any examples I could model my project off of. As of now, do I have all I need to make it a topic? Before I try to start bringing those article's up to GA/FA, I would like to know how many actual article's I am going to be dealing with. I've included the film, the book it's screenplay was adapted from, the person the film is based on, it's score/soundtrack, the list regarding it's awards, the director and principal actor. Like, if I were to nominate this now, is it likely a user would oppose it since it's cast (like Amber Tamblyn and Kate Mara, who have bit roles) and producers/writers aren't at least GAs? Regards Crystal Clear x3 11:56, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 11:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Cosmetic changes
Per WP:COSMETICBOT, please do not make cosmetic changes to pages unless you are making other changes at the same time. Thanks you! &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I notice you are still doing this (example), despite my request yesterday. Could you stop please? &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 11:49, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Fine, I'll stop, though I do not consider them cosmetic changes in the slightest. I forget that people hate when maintenance is done. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 14:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * In wiki-speak "cosmetic" means that you are changing the wikicode but not changing the output in any way. This clearly describes the situation here. These have proved controversial in the past, so it's probably better not to go down that road. Anyway thanks for stopping. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:57, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

PR/GA
I noticed this edit. Is there a new policy at either WP:PR or WP:GAC disallowing simultaneous nomination. I have seen recent talk page debate, but I have not seen anywhere that policy has changed. Neither page shows any disallowance of simultaneous nomination at this time.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:37, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * After examining WP:PR and WP:GAC I see no policy change regarding simultaneous nomination. Let me know if and when policy does change.  Meanwhile, I have reverted your edit.  Believe me when I say dozens and dozens of other reviewers have been untroubled by PR tags while doing GAC reviews on my articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:44, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
 * It would seem to make more sense to wait for the peer review before nominating for GAC, otherwise you risk wasting other editors' time. &mdash; Martin (MSGJ · talk) 12:58, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Brad Lidge
Why? Just curious. &mdash; KV5  •  Talk  •  15:22, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:52, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Kenny Dalglish
(copied from GA review page)

Many thanks for taking the time and trouble to do this and for being so thorough. There is clearly a lot of work that needs doing; I hope to address the main points you raise over the next few days, and then think about other ways of improving the article, fine-tuning etc. After that we can reconsider resubmitting it. Progress may be slow (especially when it comes to getting more KD images for WP), but on the other hand there is no real rush, I suppose:) I also think that the article still has great potential. Regards, Jprw (talk) 05:36, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Drew Carey
Up for GAR here. I'm stunned that you'd do a one-sentence drive-by and call it a GAR. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 16:18, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Quick question
I recently made some changes to the Blair Waldorf article. Not certain if I should push for Good Article status. I'm not asking you to read the whole thing, but from a quick glance, does anything stand out as absent/lacking to you? I've mainly focused on the "Novel" section, since I think "TV" is pretty complete. -- James26 (talk) 18:14, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. -- James26 (talk) 20:01, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

?
Please tell me why you deleted 2012 San Francisco Giants season. Other sporting events have the tournaments that follow the current year already created. A user that has been on Wikipedia since 10.28.2010 18:36, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Lil iROCC Williams
I notice that you're not around here, but early this month you paced a few tags on the Lil iROCC Williams page. I just wanted to know if the update to the page I made was sufficient enough? I expanded and updated his info a little. --Spence The Chef (talk) 20:58, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Early close of AfD
Hi W. I hadn't !voted (I left a comment, but was still considering my !vote), but noticed that you closed an AfD a day early here. Was just wondering what your thinking was. There were 2 !votes, and 2 comments at the time, and it didn't look like a snow to me given the paucity of input. Tx. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:45, 17 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I would have to agree. I sometimes punch them a little early when I do my relist run but I would have let the clock tick out the full 168 on this one considering that the two neutral comments were leaning toward "keep". (at least MQS was). *sigh* I probably should have relisted this one. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 02:38, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

Killebrew
No problem at all, I intended to have a look anyway. I should be able to at least make a start today, but it may take a while as it looks quite long. --Sarastro1 (talk) 17:38, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * I've found a few prose issues so far (probably the result of many editors working on it) but rather than list them, I've copy-edited what I could. My baseball is improving but still not the best, so please check the changes I've made and fix anything I've messed up. I've left some comments too, but my brain aches for tonight and I'll return tomorrow once you've checked what I've done so far. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:59, 13 July 2011 (UTC)
 * Finally done! Just a few last things I've mentioned and then I'll be happy to support. Sorry that it took so long. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:29, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

number
You have 60th place in most edits (136622). Nice! Probably changed by the time you read this. Here:  A   user who has been editing Wikipedia since Thursday, October 28, 2010.  23:05, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 01:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Jeriome Robertson
Thanks from me and the Wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

2011 Guerrero earthquake
Hello. Thanks again for GA reviewing the article; I've fixed the issues you mentioned. Cheers, ★ Auree  talk 02:49, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

That "semi retired" tag
I just got this message on my talk page about an AFD you closed back in April. The challenging editor was under the impression that you are inactive and that there would be no point in discussing the close with you. If you're going to be closing AFDs would you consider removing that tag from your talk page as it is confusing to some editors who may wish to discuss your administrative actions. --Ron Ritzman (talk) 00:17, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

About Matt Jarvis (psychologist)
Hi Wizardman - I've just re-started an article talk page you deleted: "contribs) deleted 'Talk:Matt Jarvis (psychologist)' (G8: Talk page of a deleted page)"Discussion about the article itself is underway here. Your thoughts about this?  --Shirt58 (talk) 14:30, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Justin Orenduff (2nd nomination)
You are invited to join the discussion at Articles for deletion/Justin Orenduff (2nd nomination). —Bagumba (talk) 23:34, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

A question
Dear Wizardman
 * You have achieved the deletion of a page. If I have new arguments against your decision, may I discuss that with you, or should I proceed in an other way?

thanks --Amintib (talk) 16:20, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Hello
Sorry to bother you, but I saw that you are one of the guys that made a peer review of the List of NK Maribor seasons and commented that the article is potentially FLC-ready list. I believe I have finished with the list and dont see what else could I add to it (maybe a 'timeline' section?) and therefore I am wondering, if the article is FLC ready, how/where do I make it a FL candidate? Thank you, Ratipok (talk) 03:38, 24 July 2011 (UTC).
 * Ok, thanks. But since I have never nominated a list for anything, I am basiclly wondering now how do you even nominate a list to become a FCL candidate? Thanks again, Ratipok (talk) 17:50, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
 * OK, the list is nominated. Thanks for the help. Ratipok (talk) 23:03, 24 July 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) 12:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Update on Bob Gibson work
Wizardman, thank you for the friendly note you left on 2 July asking about the status of work on Bob Gibson's article. Right now I don't have any timetable on a GA submission in mind, as my wiki contributions have slowed to a trickle. The biggest hangup to a GA submission is finding more references aside from Gibby's autobiography that go over the details of Gibson's life aside from the main baseball accomplishments. I feel like Gibson's article really is more of a one-source trick pony at this point, and an article utilizing primarily one source just isn't a GA quality article. I'm not giving up on the article, it's just a matter of how long it's going to take to get it in the right shape. Hope you've been having a good year wiki-wise so far, and I look forward to see more of your baseball article work! Cheers, Monowi (talk) 04:36, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 July 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:07, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Happy Chandler
Well, I think I'm about done with the rewrite. Anything else you want to do before we move it to the mainspace? If I put it up for peer review, could you get some baseball folks to contribute? Acdixon (talk • contribs • count) 19:39, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

GA review
Hi Wizardman, I'm just wondering if you'll be willing to review one of my GANs if I review one of yours? You know, get the thing done and dusted before we move on. Thanks Sp33dyphil  "Ad astra" 08:41, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are (Pool A, 189 points) and  (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from ) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from ). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!

There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. 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 11:48, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

FYI
Today's featured article/requests Dabomb87 (talk) 15:29, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Antemurale myth
Taking in consideration this change and the fact there is no large backlog of hooks in DYK nomination process, do you think I could nominate Antemurale myth again taking in consideration that it was created and expanded before the oldest date listed in Template talk:Did you know?--Antidiskriminator (talk) 17:59, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, I thought that there is lack of hooks for DYK section and therefore I wrote above message. Sorry for my mistake.--Antidiskriminator (talk) 13:51, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

IRC tomorrow at 8?
Where've you been? I've been waiting for you for Hell's Kitchen all week. Already the 5th episode. Just nagging you to get on at that hour. :P Mitch 32(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?) 00:45, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:22, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Golding Bird
Hi Wizardman, thanks for reviewing Golding Bird. I have spent a few weeks away from Wikipedia because it was all becoming a little stressful so I had not noticed you had picked up the review. If you are still willing to run with this I am dealing with your comments now.  Spinning Spark  16:26, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It is ready now for you to take a look.  Spinning Spark  23:44, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Hardman & Co.
You deleted, rather than rewriting, a paragraph essential to the article, and made reference to a 2006 copyright vio. I haven't the faintest idea what you are talking about as no copyright violation was recorded in 2006, or later in edit summaries, or on the talk page. Can you explain? Amandajm (talk) 02:00, 6 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Well, you were a bit heavy handed there! One sentence had been substantially rewritten. There was an expression that needed rephrasing in the second sentence. Amandajm (talk) 02:17, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

GA review
Hello Wizardman:

I'll review Jeriome Robertson if you'll review Mike Jackson (right-handed pitcher) or Duff Cooley, preferably the former. Best, Albacore (talk) 19:18, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Thank you
I wanted to thank you for the work you performed on my copyright investigation and the clean up to the Dayton, Ohio article. Before the investigation began, I had no idea that I was not conforming to Wikipedia policy by copy editing and citing a source to where I got the information. These edits were purely good faith edits and I did not realize at the time that I had to significantly reword the information before adding it to an article. Ever since the investigation began, I have been much more careful about how I edit articles and after reading up on Wikipedia policy, I now know what is expected when editing articles.

On another note, I also wanted to thank you for the clean up of the Dayton, Ohio article. Even though some of the edits that you worked on were not mine, the clean up still needed to be performed. I would like the article to remain in GA status, and I feel that you have helped to keep it there because of the clean up. Thanks again, I am a much more careful editor now because of all of this. Texas141 (talk) 22:53, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:43, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Nadia Ali discography
Hey there, I wanted to ask you for a favour? I nominated Nadia Ali discography for FL back in June and the nomination is still open. Could you please do me a favour and have a look at it? Apparently, I need 3 or 4 reviewers before it gets closed. I'd really appreciate the help! Hassan514 (talk) 22:56, 9 August 2011 (UTC)

Aruba at the 2008 Summer Olympics
I don't think I ever really thanked you for taking responsibility for it, so I figured I'd just drop by and give you one of these...

Once again, thank you. Good day to you, Wizardman. :) --Starstriker7(Talk) 14:36, 10 August 2011 (UTC)

1978 European Cup Final
Hey, just to let you know that the copyedit on the article has now been done, hopefully that has cleared up the prose issues. NapHit (talk) 16:45, 11 August 2011 (UTC)

Removed images
Why are you taking the "Replace this image male.svg" off of the U.S. Senate lists? —Markles 16:08, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Template:WikiProject United States
Greetings Wizardman, I have recently made a number of changes to the WikiProject United States template to add a couple more projects and standardize the catgories and functionality across projects but for some reason one problem seems to be eluding me. For the life of me I cannot figure out why the WikiProject US Counties will not display the importance. Would you mind taking a look and see if maybe you cna see what the problem is? --Kumioko (talk) 17:57, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I replied to your reply on my talk page but I wanted to say thanks here too. --Kumioko (talk) 18:19, 11 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry to bother you again but I was wondering if I could ask another favor. There are a lot of changes in the Sandbox version of the template that are waiting to be implemented and knowone has responded to the request on the templates talk page. I have already added the changes that you made to the sandbox version and compared them to make sure that all the necessary differences are in sinc. Would you be willing to make those changes? All you have to do is copy the sandbox version over the current version. The list of changes can be seen on the talk page of the template. Please let me know if you have any questions or if you are not comfortable making the change. --Kumioko (talk) 13:51, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much. --Kumioko (talk) 14:44, 12 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Sorry to ask again so soon but would you mind copying over the sandbox changes of Template:WikiProject United States to the live template again. There are quite a few changes in the last couple days. I think we should be about done with the changes though. I left a summery of the what was changed on the template talk page. --Kumioko (talk) 19:28, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Please comment on Talk:Hawiye
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Hawiye. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.

''You have received this notice because your name is on Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page.'' RFC&#32;bot (talk) 15:05, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

Billy Williams
It seems we've reached some level of consensus on Billy Williams. As you're an admin, could you go about enacting it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.47.240 (talk) 10:27, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
 * So, if Billy Williams (baseball) is allowed to be a primary topic, what form will the eventual disambiguation page take? Will it be Billy Williams (baseball) (disambiguation) or Billy Williams (baseball (disambiguation))? My future on Wikipedia hinges on your response. And no, that is not a joke. -Dewelar (talk) 09:22, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, but what happens if/when you have more baseball Billy Williamses than fit comfortably in a hatnote? -Dewelar (talk) 16:15, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * The gist of my argument here, as it has been all along, is that you can't have an ambiguous disambiguator. It's an oxymoron. Once it's ambiguous, it's not useful any more; see the hatnote that I added to Billy Williams (baseball) to see what I mean, and where this could eventually lead. If nothing else, it's bad precedent. Anyway, I've responded to you at the project talk page, and we can continue our discussion there if you prefer. -Dewelar (talk) 18:29, 14 August 2011 (UTC)
 * I would think that the top of the Billy Williams (baseball) page would say "For the other baseball player of the same name, see Billy Williams (Seattle Pilots)." Then both Billy Williams (baseball) and Billy Williams (Seattle Pilots) would appear on the Billy Williams (disambiguation) page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.3.47.240 (talk) 09:55, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Possible article for deletion
I would like to bring to your notice the article Incredible India. It fails many of the guidelines to be followed by Wikipedia article, and follows a very personal and biased tone, more like a journalist's newspaper scoop. I strongly suggest a deletion, and I was hoping you could help with it.

Hope to hear from you soon.

 Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 12:35, 15 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Well, maybe not an outright deletion. i think it would be best if an editor entirely cleaned up the article, rewrote the content. I agree with the criticisms put forward by the article, so I think putting up a new section titled "Criticism" would be good. Also, the lead will have to be totally revamped. I don't know, it's just a suggestion. What do you think? I'm still not too familiar with the in-depth technicalities of Wikipedia.  Ankit Bhatt  Talk to me!! LifEnjoy 12:08, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:58, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

Doh!
Apologies for bothering you - User:Quadell pointed me in your direction - I made an edit to Talk:Augmentative_and_alternative_communication page without logging in - could you revDelete? It's a little too easy to work out exactly where I live from the IP address, and that makes me really uncomfortable... can do email if you want more particulars... it's this edit.... Thanks Failedwizard (talk) 15:53, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * It seems that the IP is still visible in previous versions... is this a problem? I am willing to revert all my comments and re-comment, if it will help... – Quadell (talk) 17:14, 16 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Deleted any diffs which had the IP now. Wizardman  Operation Big Bear 17:22, 16 August 2011 (UTC)

notice of intent to file arbitration dispute
Dear Wizardman

This is a notice of intent to file an arbitration dispute regarding your repeated deletion of encyclopedic material from the Commodity Futures Modernization Act of 2000 article. If you do not respond in 10 days then a dispute will be filed through the standard Wikipedia process.

Decora (talk) 09:37, 18 August 2011 (UTC)


 * actually i misspoke, it is not to "arbitration" level yet. i am instead starting the "dispute resolution" process, thanks. Decora (talk) 00:17, 19 August 2011 (UTC)
 * ok here is the link to the dispute resolution post i made http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard

Hello
I just wanted to say thanks for reviewing my article Warning from Space, and I addressed most of the issues.--Architeuthidae (Talk | Contributions) 21:09, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on August 29, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/August 29, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  04:30, 20 August 2011 (UTC)

 

Orval Grove (1919–1992) was an American pitcher in Major League Baseball who played for ten seasons in the American League with the Chicago White Sox. In 207 career games, Grove pitched 1,176 innings and posted a win–loss record of 63–73, with 66 complete games, 11 shutouts, and a 3.78 earned run average (ERA). The only freshman on the Proviso East High School varsity baseball team, Grove's pitching ability attracted the attention of the White Sox. After signing with the team in 1937, Grove moved between the major leagues and minor leagues for a few seasons until 1943. Grove had a career-year in 1943, finishing the season with career-bests in ERA, wins, and complete games; in 1944, he made his only All-Star appearance. Grove spent four more full seasons with the White Sox, and after pitching one game in 1949, was sent to the Sacramento Solons of the Pacific Coast League. After playing four seasons with them, he formally retired from professional baseball. After retirement, he worked with his uncle in a trucking business in Chicago while continuing to pitch at the semi-pro level. (more...)

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) 12:47, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Kepler-10c nomination
Hi, Wizardman! I've addressed the comments in your review on Kepler-10c, so just giving you the heads-up. --Starstriker7(Talk) 00:57, 22 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks for reviewing the article, and for helping me get this one to GA. :) --Starstriker7(Talk) 03:44, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

STOP
stop screwing with my nomination. i made it its not up to you! — Preceding unsigned comment added by PillowPet193 (talk • contribs) 18:52, 22 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 August 2011
Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 00:50, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

ZHL-U1953
You closed the discussion at Redirects for discussion/Log/2011 August 5 as "delete". However I don't see a consensus to delete there - the nomination reason was that the redirect is "completely useless". I provided evidence of use to show that this was actually being used and so was not useless. The nominator (user:Headbomb) disputed that these figures meant anything, and then user:Tideflat commented that "it is likely to be safer to leave to redirect just in case people are truly looking it". Tideflat's comment was not accompanied by an explicitly bolded recommendation, but seems to me to be a "keep" !vote.

The final tally was therefore either 1 delete, 1 keep; or 1 delete 2 keep (depending on how you read Tideflat's comment), which points to either a "keep" or "no consensus" outcome. RfD is not a vote, so looking at the comments we have: So that's one person arguing it's useless because I say it is (delete), one person arguing it's useful because there is evidence of use (keep), and one person arguing either that it's useful or that we can't know whether it's useful or not (keep). So again we have 1 delete and 1 or 2 keeps, so the possible outcomes are "keep" or "no consensus" as far as I can see it. Thryduulf (talk) 10:26, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Headbomb: "it's useless",
 * Thryduulf (me): "it's not useless because it's being used"
 * Headbomb: "I think most of those hits are me, so it's useless"
 * Tideflat: "We can't know where the hits come from, so we should leave it in case people are using it"
 * The point is that we cannot know where the hits came from, and anyway long standing consensus at RfD is that lack of use is not in itself necessarily a reason to delete. This argument was presented in the discussion by myself and Tideflat. Thryduulf (talk) 15:52, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

Craig McAllister GA Review
Hi Wizardman, I've corrected all the issues you braught up in the review and believe it is ready to be passed, thank you,  Liam Taylor  19:12, 23 August 2011 (UTC)

User:Mike28968
It appears that he isn't taking this seriously, see Talk:WhiteWater World/GA2. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:00, 23 August 2011 (UTC)


 * On a related note, WindSeeker was reviewed and passed by this user, and after a brief edit war on the talk page (which is hopefully over), a reassessment has been started, but it needs input from an uninvolved editor. Since you started the process of sending it back for another review, would you be willing to give it that input? If so, I would greatly appreciate it. I'm somewhat involved with the article myself (being the author of many of the photos on it), and would like to see it as a GA, but I want to see it get there the right way. Thanks. jcgoble3 (talk) 00:32, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * About the windseeker review, the only remaining problem is the day windseeker opened at Canadas Wonderland. Agreeing with Jcgoble3, I can not review the article so just wanted to let you know that I have found a reference that state the ride opened on May 24 which was issued by Canadas Wonderland. I know this is the day that the ride was only opened for 1 hour but if the public rode the ride on a regular operating day than it was technically the official opening day. I will add the reference within the next 20 hours (from the time this message was posted). Please don't review the article until I add the reference. After I add the reference, the article should meet the GA criteria as the only reason why the reassessment was requested was because of the missing reference for the opening day.--Dom497 (talk) 00:51, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I have added the reference that I found on the internet and added it to the article. You can now go ahead and review the article.--Dom497 (talk) 11:45, 24 August 2011 (UTC)\


 * Ok, we fixed up what you requested... except i left a comment on the review page regarding the youtube sources.--Dom497 (talk) 15:49, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok, i was able to delete and replace all of the youtube references on the WindSeeker article.--Dom497 (talk) 19:42, 24 August 2011 (UTC)


 * I finished what you said should be changed.--Dom497 (talk) 13:41, 26 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Finished!!!--Dom497 (talk) 18:17, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Baseball card photos
I'd be happy to check. I may not be able to for a couple more days, however, as I don't have access to a computer at the moment. I don't have much experience searching the copyright records, which is what I assume is necessary for that set. I believe that the template for Bowman cards lists a few databases that you could search. Delaywaves talk  23:37, 24 August 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm... I'm back at my computer, and I tried searching the templates that are mentioned on the {PD-US-not renewed, Baseball Digest pre-1964} template. (I was wrong, it wasn't the Bowman one that listed those databases.) A search for "Leaf Baseball" here reveals that from 1978-present, no copyrights were renewed for Leaf until 1990, but I guess that isn't what you're looking for. The database that is listed on that template that searches before 1978 seemed to only be by the last name of authors. (So searching the company name "Leaf" didn't work.) I can't find anything else that yields any good results, sorry. On another note, your Operation Big Bear is a pretty ambitious project, and it seems that you're making some good progress. Nice job! Delaywaves  talk  00:58, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: GAN
Hey, while I was dealing with Irene, User:Buggie111 helped deal with my GAN. I believe the issues are addressed now. Thanks for checking it out. ♫ Hurricanehink ( talk ) 13:13, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

Re: old GA reviews
I hoped there would be action during the weekend, as reviewer promised, but nothing changed (Talk:Władysław IV Vasa/GA1, Talk:Battle of Bautzen (1945)/GA1). What should we do? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 17:07, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
 * In this particular case the editor suddenly took a wikibreak, in the middle of various projects. Real life, I guess, often trumps Wikipedia, including projects that people were supposed to commit to and had others counting on them. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; talk to me 17:20, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

WindSeeker A-Class???
Hey, I know I've been bugging you lately, but i just wanted to ask what it would take to make the WindSeeker article an A-class article??--Dom497 (talk) 19:49, 29 August 2011 (UTC)


 * Ok thanks!--Dom497 (talk) 22:22, 29 August 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 August 2011
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 09:20, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Reply
Yeah, I can do it later tonight. Also, about procedural noms. Can they be made when a topic seems potential? I have one in mind but I'm not sure. GamerPro64 16:33, 30 August 2011 (UTC)