User talk:OhanaUnited/Archive 3

Runescape

Please make me. Wwefan980 22:14, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia, it's nice to know that people really do look out for newcomers here.

GAC backlog

It's great that you want to start another drive, I really want to see this go away! I don't think it is worse than before, we were up to 180 articles before the first drive and it went down to around 106. Right now it's at about 140. A drive format similar to the biography drive sounds great, but is there alternate awards to be offered besides the GA medal of merit? I think once this is setup somewhat, you should make mention of it on the GAC talk page to see how many people are willing to get invovled with the drive. Also, it would have to last longer than the two weeks that I set, maybe a month or something. Once the backlog gets down to around 30-50 articles, it will be a lot easier to manage and reviews will occur faster after the articles have been nominated. --Nehrams2020 03:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The sooner to start it would be better. I think you should also talk to user Epbr123 who is awarded barnstars each week. I'm sure it would be more beneficial if we coordinate our efforts with his as well. Once we are all prepared, we can use my GA reviews page again with a new section if you want unless there was something else you want to use. Are we basing it off of who did the most reviews, and if so, would we only include a running number or would they be required to list all of their reviews? I think one month would be the best to run this off of, and advertising it in the Community portal, the awardcenter, and talk pages of GA/GAC/GAR, etc. would also help. I'll also send messages to all of the members again once the drive gets started. Were you able to determine what awards you want to give out? --Nehrams2020 18:50, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

OK, that's what I figured. I though that since you meant the Bio drive who was going of of highest reviewed, would be similar to what we were trying. I also realize that there were some problematic GAs passed during the last drive, so we'll just have to keep up with them. What set number do you think is reasonable? For coordinating among the three people here, are you talking about just starting it or what? I'm a little confused on what you are saying. Once you start it, I'll help to start advertising it and setting up anything else that needs to be fixed. I'm leaving my computer for a few hours, so if you start it while I'm gone, I'll help as soon as I get back. --Nehrams2020 19:22, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to bed right now and have to work in the morning until 10a.m. West Coast Time. Sometime after that I'll send the messages out to everybody. I think that the awards should be lowered somewhat, because if we have a lot of people participating, it is likely that nobody is going to be able to reach 50 out of the 130 or so articles there are. Maybe bring it down to 25, and give half a review for quick fails or something as quick fails still remove the article from the backlog. Let me know what you decide, I'll get back to you later. Good job on starting it. --Nehrams2020 07:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd like to congratulate you both for your efforts - this drive is an excellent idea. I don't really have any other suggestions to make, except maybe the difference between a fail and a quick-fail could be explained more on the backlog page. When I assess the winners of my GA Reviewer of the Week awards, I'll keep a look out for any users blatantly rushing through reviews to get their numbers up. Epbr123 10:17, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I've added a wikilink to "quick-fail"; that should be enough. Epbr123 10:31, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, I would be willing to give away any awards necessary as long as this backlog disappears. I really hope that we bring this backlog down a bit. I'll send messages out to all past reviewers and GA members today. I usually have quick-fails myself, but that is usually for articles that don't even come near to reaching the requirements of the GA criteria. Of course, I don't see myself being one of the highest reviewers as I have a GA that I want to work on, but I should have at least two or three a week done. Let's see how this goes! --Nehrams2020 17:50, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

You can leave a message on the GAC, GA, GAReview, and GA criteria (or if there's any others) talking about it. If you also got the community portal, then I'll get the users. I'll use AWB so it'll be easier. --Nehrams2020 17:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

The talk pages, but maybe you can also edit the backlog template on the main GAC page at the top to include a link to the drive also. I should be done by the time you wake up. --Nehrams2020 18:09, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

When exactly does the drive start? Epbr123 23:24, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

I have sent messages to all members and GA reviewers. --Nehrams2020 05:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I left a message on one user's page who added reviews completed in June, and it looks like another member already removed them. Other than that, should we verify all of them at the end of the drive? Are we planning to hand out all awards at the end or as soon as the user reaches the quota? I'd say at the end would be best, to avoid multiple awards for the same user. --Nehrams2020 05:21, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, that's probably a good idea. With my last drive, there were a few improper reviews from brand new reviewers. I'm sure we'll see some more here, and it's possible some may go to GA review. As Epbr123 asked, are we counting reviews that occurred at the beginning of the month or at the creation of the backlog page? I have a review from a few days before the drive started and I'm sure other editors may as well, so it may be important to mention what reviews are being counted (obviously not the June ones). --Nehrams2020 05:29, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Right, I'm sure were going to see a lot of the same people, some people that haven't reviewed in a while, and hopefully, a few people who are doing it for the first time and get hooked. If we get the backlog almost completely eliminated or reduced quite a bit, then a much smaller group of reviewers can maintain the GAC. If I knew it was down to 20-50, I would review articles more often. --Nehrams2020 05:35, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

That should be fine, but I read today that the bot that manages GA automatically updates GA history. Should the reviewer just add the GA template and then tell the nominator or people managing the page to add the article history? That way, the people who know all about the article will be able to also add peer reviews, FACs, and any other events. I've still been using the old GA template, but updated the article history for one that was already established on the talk page. --Nehrams2020 05:42, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd say that it's up to the reviewer to use which one they want. If they use both, they'll look kind of redundant. For example, I passed Malcolm Sargent, and on the talk page, the article history is merged into the GA template so it would look like the same template was being used twice if both were included. As long as the reviewer adds at least one of them, the article should still show up in the proper categories for the bot to manage it. --Nehrams2020 05:50, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I don't think it would be beneficial for me to also say something when Epbr123 already left a comment as well, as it may look like the coordinators are attacking him. You've already directed him to how to review an article properly and Epbr123 gave him some suggestions on what to look for. I do think that the railroad article needs to be delisted for lack of sources, as the sourcing does not start until halfway into the article. --Nehrams2020 17:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

Well that's good then, as we are watching this drive 24 hours a day! --Nehrams2020 18:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

My Potential RfA

Thank you for offering to nominate me for adminship. I accept it. Captain panda 04:14, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

RfA formally accepted and questions answered. Captain panda 14:44, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your acknowledgement. You've been an exemplary leader for the ERTF! Keep up the great work. Benzocane 15:10, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

Contributions section ERTF

My mistake! I didn't mean to remove the section (and had not realized that I did)--I was just trying to set up a numbering system for the completed articles. Thanks for your note and keep up the great work! Cyrusc 20:39, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Portal:Vancouver review

Howdy OhanaUnited. You commented on Wikipedia:Featured portal removal candidates/Portal:Vancouver a little while ago. The circumstances of the nomination have since changed, and it is requested that you review your position in light of this. Thanks,--cj | talk 04:55, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for supporting the Octopus card FAC nomination. Maybe you could start a new bullet pointed line and put right in the front Support so it's easier for others to see it? Hong Qi Gong (Talk - Contribs) 06:02, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Kritosaurus

Does this article ring a bell? Well, I'm here to tell you that it's now GA status. Congrats. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:10, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ohana!

Thanks for the review. We'll try to find a picture, of course, but it's hard; most modern pictures of this one tend to turn out to be of other dinosaurs. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:18, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! It would be fitting to have a drawing where the snout is obscured by foliage or something, like restorations where the tail or feet of some animal are hidden by the artist because there weren't any bones known. J. Spencer 20:04, 9 July 2007 (UTC)

Non-free use disputed for Image:Pigeon_William_of_Orange.JPG

This file may be deleted.

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

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our Criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Konstable 23:49, 10 July 2007 (UTC)

Invitation for WIKIMEDIA HONG KONG Establishment Ceremony and night banquet

Held on 14th, July,2007 （星期六）3:00 p.m. At CityTopRest, 9/F Recreational building, Hong Kong City University WIKIMEDIA HONG KONG Establishment Ceremony Refreshment is prepared. You are welcomed. Sith lord darth vader敬約 If you are not free, please click here to reply.

Remove user sub-page

Can you remove User:OhanaUnited/Local Events and Culture? I don't think I'll need it any more. Many thanks. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 18:04, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

I hope by remove you meant delete, because that is what I did. Firsfron of Ronchester 18:19, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

GA promotion of articles

Ummm... I did leave notes on the talk pages explaining why I passed the articles that I passed, but I did not use the GA checklist template and such, since, well, it seemed pointless. Instead, I described my appraisal of the article according to "What is a good article". And, yes, I have read the Good Articles Candidates information thoroughly and reviewed the Manual of Style. What exactly would you like me to do to improve my reviewing (other than use that checklist)? --Meowist 19:57, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Well, I was looking for a prettier way to do this, but I'm not very artistic, so I'll just say thank you for your support in my RfA, which was closed as successful. I look forward to serving the community in a new way. Take care! -- But|seriously|folks  08:36, 12 July 2007 (UTC)

Postelsia - Good Article Nomination - Reference Comment

There are few references as it is, as it is a very little known organism, and these four have it covered. I can go digging, if you like, though. Werothegreat 15:14, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Currently doing so. Work in progress. Werothegreat 16:19, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Think I'm finished. Most of the stuff I found allowed me to expand the article. Werothegreat 17:08, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the GA status. I've put a lot of time into that article. But I didn't personally make the images, they were free use on of the reference sites. The site owner specifically states that anyone is free to use them. This is so stated on the image page. But thanks anyway! Werothegreat 17:41, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Thank you for your helpful comments in my RfA, which did not succeed. Thanks for your time! Neranei ^T/C 16:38, 14 July 2007 (UTC)

GAC Review of Cretaceous–Tertiary extinction event

Hi,

I'm AshLin, and a new GAC reviewer. I had chosen K-T extinction event for review. Due to internet problems which I have stated in my home-page, I had to work offline. I have done the review with great care and thought and put in many hours of work on it. My comments in the talk page will bear me out. In the GAC home page, I have tagged KT event for review. Despite this, User:Vikrant Phadkay proceeded with a review and passed it just hours before I posted my comments. I wouldnt have minded had he posted me, he did not. Nor would I have minded it if he had done a satisfactory worksmanlike job- there isnt a single comment!

For my antecedents please look up

• Wanna_be_kate for User:AshLin.
• Deep Impact (space mission). GAC pass.
• Talk:152_mm_howitzer_M1943_(D-1).

Now my work gets discounted, I cant take credit for passing the article. In my opinion the article is not ready for passing outright. Its obvious the other reviewer has not bothered to go into the spirit of the thing. I feel an injustice has been done to me and I dont know how to get redressal. I am discouraged but will not halt my GAC work at present.

I am writing to you because you are an initiator of this backlog elimination drive. Regards, AshLin 16:36, 15 July 2007 (UTC)

Revoking the GA status was a bit demoralizing after all of the hard work. I appreciate AshLin's comments but reverting the GA without giving a reason was a bit surprising. Orangemarlin 18:43, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi!

Hi! It's Gakmo from zh.wikipedia! Nice to meet you in the ceremony! Hope to talk with you in the next meeting. Keep in touch! --Gakmo 03:43, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

Smile!

Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

Hello there OhanaUnited. I noticed your question at my editor review. I will need to take sometime to think on it, so don't think I'm just avoiding the answer. Thanks. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 22:40, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Question answered. --Tλε Rαnδom Eδιτor (ταlκ) 20:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

New Richmond Tornado

I'd like to take over the review of this article and go ahead and fail it. It's been on hold for a week and a half. The reviewer (user:Hersfold) has not made edits in several days and the suggestions he has made have not been addressed. This would not be for credit in the drive (if he is participating, he should keep credit), I just want to get it processed. Regards, LaraLove 16:24, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

Doh! I didn't even see the wikibreak notice. I blame the blonde. Alright, thanks. LaraLove 16:38, 17 July 2007 (UTC)

After Summer Gathering

It's my honor to see you again in Gatherings in Hong Kong. Still, we do not have much time to talk to each other. Anyway, thanks for attending the ceremony & I hope you may join us in the coming gatherings before you going back to Canada.--JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 11:25, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, Andrew. Please watch for the date of the template, it was last year's stuff........we may still have some gatherings before 13-Aug anyway. I'll let you know if anything confirms. --JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 17:49, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Silent Spring

Hi,

I have completed my review of Silent Spring and placed my comments on talk page. Would you be interested in responding to the comments or requesting somebody else?

Thanks, AshLin 15:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I do not have a copy of the book so I cant do that. Two users have indicated their interest but I do not know if they are likely to be able to respond to my comments in 7 days. From your unfamiliarity with the book, I take it that you may not be able to do so either. So I propose to check back with one (one has already said he cant respond in time) and FAIL the article if he indicates his inability too. However I remain willing to be involved as the GA reviewer till the comments are done and then the article may be renominated. Your comments please before I fail it. In good faith, AshLin 09:39, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

OhanaUnited, as I mentioned on AshLin's talk page, I don't expect to do any serious work on Silent Spring in the immediate future. Although I've read it, I would need to take a while re-reading parts of it to write a proper summary. I'm trying to finish updating Rachel Carson, and then I have two other wiki obligations (plus a dissertation prospectus, but that's a whole different beast) before I can start any new projects. However, if you want to work on Silent Spring and don't know where to begin, you might try the book The Recurring Silent Spring by H. Patricia Hines. Sorry I can't be more helpful right now--ragesoss 12:57, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Hi OhanaUnited, based on this, I'm failing the GA nomination. Lets hope that a successful collaboration in the future will develop this article later on. Regards, AshLin 13:35, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Re:GA Review

The references in NLRB are confusing for non lawyers, however that isn't as far as I can see in the criteria (maybe I am wrong?) a bar to GA, per se. The image in Raelian Beliefs has a copyright tag as of this writing (07:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)) and meets 6(c). I am sure i commented on the review, but it might have gone on a subpage. If you have any further questions or concerns, please do not hesitate to page me.

Respectfully yours;

--Dagomar 07:57, 20 July 2007 (UTC)07:56, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

please see

• Please see this Ling.Nut 14:47, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Misplaced talk page comment

FYI. Carcharoth 14:41, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

		Thank you
		Thank you for your opposition of my recent unsuccsessful rfa, which concluded today with a final tally of 22/15/3. The comments and suggestions from this rfa, combined with the comments left during my first rfa, have given me a good idea of where I need improvement. —TomStar81 (Talk) 05:28, 28 July 2007 (UTC)

NLRB v J. Weingarten, Inc.

Hello. I noticed that you recently placed the article NLRB v J. Weingarten, Inc. on a list of GA reviews with concerns at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Good articles/GA nominees task force/GAC backlog elimination drive. I wrote the article and was very happy when it passed its GA review and was worried when I saw that it is now on a list of suspect articles. I was curious as to why this is. If there are some concerns with the quality of the article, I would really appreciate knowing what they are so that I can address them promptly as I would be very disapointed if it lost its GA status. Any information you can give me as to why the review was questioned and anything I can do to keep the article's GA status would be greatly appreciated. -Dekkanar 05:23, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the helpful comments on my talk page. I have started reformating the references by using wikipedia's citation template for court cases(which I now realize I should have used in the first place). I will finish that up later. I will also use the cite journal template for the last reference, although thatdoes not include a section for ISBN numbers because, I believe, journals are not generally published with ISBN numbers. Thank you again for your comments and I hope very much that it will pass GA re-review. -Dekkanar 17:07, 30 July 2007 (UTC)

I have finished the edits to the references to bring them in line with Wikipedia's recommended templates for citation to cases and journal. Sorry for not letting you know, I didn't realize you were waiting on me to finish that before resolving the GA issues. Dekkanar 20:10, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Hong Kong Gathering thing

Hi Andrew, it's me again. Well, we'll have one gathering(*not regional one*) before you go back to Canada. It is scheduled on Saturday August 11th, at sometime after 5pm. & we are going to be expected to meet in somewhere in Yuen Long (*not sure isn't it far for you*).... anyway, if you may not be able to come, it doesn't matter. You may still give us some advice on the venue. I hope you have some information about this in your mind. I had just posted a canned message template in Chinese Wikipedia Talk Page :p, Plz check it out.

ThX --JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 18:16, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

Notes on the Categorization Slog. You are setting topic in accordance with WP:GA, aren't you (pretty please)?

Hello, OhanaUnited, I know you're in this categorization slog with me as well; seen your posts on the talk page and all that. Your name came to me via the talk page history of Pennsylvania Route 222. You see, I had correspondence with O after he had set the topic of Pennsylvania Route 145 from Engtech, its classification at WP:GA to Geography, which, at first blush, seems a better choice. O cheerfully pointed out to me that he was only following the lead from Pennsylvania Route 222, which you classified as a Geography article on July 25. As you may gather from my correspondence with O, some roads do not aptly fall into one geographic locale (Consider the Silk Road, which spans a few continents) which is why classifying articles on roads as geographical topics sometimes is flawed, but more importantly, we should be classifying these articles in accordance to where they are in WP:GA, or else, weeks or months from now, confusion will reign as the category pages are found to be placing articles in topic areas at odds with WP:GA. This is why schemes involving the automation of setting the topic parameter have centered on using WP:GA as the authoratative source. In accordance with that, we too in our manual schlepping around should be following WP:GA article classifications in all cases except when a Good Article is not listed at WP:GA; in that case, we may then need to use our judgement, but should classify such an article in a manner that articles similar to it are classified. And, of course, we update WP:GA after exercising judgement in this special case.

So I trust (pretty please) this setting of Route 222 to Geography was an inadvertant mistake, stemming from the fact that we all get a little cross-eyed after classifying a few dozen of these. But if, by chance, you are following a scheme other than following the classification scheme set down by WP:GA, you should air your reasoning Real Soon Now on the uncategorized article talk page. Because we should really be following the same plan regarding how to set the topic parameter, else there will be some mismatch between the various categories pages and WP:GA, and there will be Fingers Pointed, and endless talk page threads to read. Any questions, drop me a note on my talk page. Thanks for your help; take care — Gosgood 21:19, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

My RfA

Hi, OhanaUnited, and thanks for your participation in my RfA. I've withdrawn it, and will be writing up an "analysis" of it, which will soon be available at User:Giggy/RfA/Giggy when it's done. Please come around when you get the chance, and give me feedback on how I can improve. Thanks again, Giggy _U^CP 04:17, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Never mind

Well, a bit complicated about the 3-Aug so called gathering. It seems that gathering didn't go through a kinda "discussion" before launching & publishing on Wikipedia. Well, some of us dun wanna recognized, including me (*Sorry for my POV*). Anyway, nice to meet you. & hope your experience from gathering with us can be helpful to you at least a bit. --JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 18:42, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the welcome

Thanks for the welcome to Wikipedia, it's nice to know that people really do look out for new comers.

GAC backlog elimination drive

As we are very close to the end of backlog elimination drive, it's time for us to vertify that every single review follows GA criteria. Now I need to deliver some news to you, I will be on a trans-Pacific flight on August 13 so I will not be able to start vertifying the moment the clock reaches August 13. We also need to organize a way so that we can complete vertification as fast as possible without any overlapping. My suggestion is to place a check mark (i.e.  Done) in front of each article vertified. Any with doubts are marked with  Question: . Does this sound good to you? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 16:02, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

• That sounds fine. When does the drive end: at the start of August 13 or at the end, and according to which timezone? Epbr123 16:14, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

That should be no problem with going with that system. We can probably start verifying articles now, and then actually award the barnstars after the completion date. --Nehrams2020 20:36, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Tireless Contributor Barnstar

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		I award OhanaUnited this barnstar for the 112 articles categorized in order to help eliminate the backlog at Category:Uncategorized good articles. Lara♥Love 17:17, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Can any non-member of the WikiProject Environment project post a WikiProject Environment template on an article Talk page and also assess the article?

To be specific, anonymous user Jbntj, who is not listed as a member of the project, posted a WikiProject Environment template of the Talk page of Fossil fuel power plant some time ago and also assessed it as a Stub Class. Is that proper? I cannot imagine anyone considering Fossil fuel power plant to be a Stub Class. It is a very large article with 16 sections, numerous diagrams, photos and references.

I might add that anonymous user Jbntj also added a WikiProject Climate Change template to Fossil fuel power plant, altho he is also not listed as a participant in that project.

And recently, he added a Cleanup tag to Fossil fuel power plant and refuses to explain why on the Talk page of that article other than to say the article is "dirty".

A very careful reading of the "Contributions" page of anonymous user Jbntj discloses that he has done this sort of thing on many energy related articles. In my opinion, he is very biased against use of coal or oil because he feels they bear a major responsibility for global warming. Wikipedia has dozens of articles devoted to global warming and climate change where anyone can contribute content or discuss their feelings about coal and oil. However, I don't believe posting WikiProject templates on technical articles about the use of coal and oil is a proper method of trying to promote biased opinions against such articles. Fossil fuel power plants are a fact of life and Wikipedians have every right to create and to contribute NPOV content to technical articles explaining how coal and oil fired power plants are designed and used.

I will be very interested to learn what members of this WikiProject Environment have to say about my above comments. OhanaUnited, please reply at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Environment. - mbeychok 01:54, 6 August 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at what Ghetsmith has done to the Talk Page of Fossil fuel power plant

He reverted you your Class B rating for the WikiProject Environment template.

He also reverted your deletion of the WikiProject Climate Change template.

He then archived selected portions of the Talk page comments so that it contains mostly just discussions of the environmental aspects.

It seems that some user (or some group of users) is bent on turning the Fossil fuel power plant into propaganda about the environmental and global warming evils attributable to power plants. I find it difficult to believe that it is just coincidental that users Jbntj and Ghetsmith just happened to come along at about the same time.

Take a look at Ghetsmith's Talk page. Is there anything that can be done to stop this behavior? - mbeychok 05:23, 7 August 2007 (UTC)

Users Ghetsmith and jbntj seem to be inactive

OhanaUnited, your listing them as sock puppetry seem to have worked since both of them now appear to be inactive. Let us hope they don't show up again new names. Thanks for your help. - mbeychok 15:27, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

AWB

I'm having trouble using AWB to correct spelling mistake, can you help me? OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 09:27, 3 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey Ohana!

What do you need help doing? What is the word you're trying to correct? What is the problem? Sorry for the delay; I went on vacation and ended up with quite limited internet access. Firsfron of Ronchester 06:53, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

1. Go to the "Make list".

2. Make from: "Google search".

3. Google search: (put in the misspelled word, in quotes, such as "sanwitch"); make sure this isn't a valid spelling.

4. Hit "Make list".

AWB will compile a list of all pages containing the misspelled word.

5. "Set option" tab: check "Skip if doesn't contain" (type in misspelled word)

6. On the menu bar, click General>Mark all as minor

7. On the "Start" tab, enter "correct spelling" (or something like that) on "Summary:"

8. In the "Find" box, enter the misspelled word.

9. Hit "Start the process".

10. Wait for the page to load.

11. Hit "find". The misspelled word will be highlighted. Make sure it's really misspelled. Wikipedia quotes Thomas Jefferson in several articles, and he misspelled "it's" frequently (substituted "it's" when he meant "belonging to it"; we don't change quotations, obviously).

12. Fix the misspelled word and then hit "Save".

13. Repeat process.

Hope this helps! :) Firsfron of Ronchester 00:46, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Proposals

I've proposed that WP:UCGA be merged into the newly created, broader focused task force of WP:GAPQ. Merge proposal is on the talk page of the former, project revamping proposals are on the talk page of the latter.

In other news, I was amused to see that your name is missing from the WP:WPGA participants list. Lara♥Love 07:01, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

I don't know if you saw my reply to your comments on my talk page, but I'll not be online on Sunday. I never am due to long work hours (typically, at least 12), so it will be late Sunday or Monday before I can get to the page once the drive has ended.

I went through the articles listed as questionable. I will look over other articles in the following days. I would think all should get a look over before awards go out, particularly from editors who are not established reviewers. Lara♥Love 06:18, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Ghetsmith

Well spotted! -- Johnfos 10:56, 9 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello!

Hi, OhanaUnited! Thanks for the message. A-yao 14:25, 13 August 2007 (UTC)

GA medal of merit

		The Good Article Medal of Merit
		I would like to commend your efforts in starting the very successful drive that helped to eliminate the extreme backlog that had been at WP:GAC for far too long. The drive helped to unite dozens of editors in reviewing several hundred articles, and has also introduced new reviewers to the GAC process. Keep up the good work, and I hope you continue to remain active at GAC. Nehrams2020 04:45, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Speaking of these, I've encountered an issue. I would appreciate if you could send me a message here. I noticed you are looking to obtain adminship in the future. Enabling email is usually recommended. I'd appreciate speaking with you about this through email. Lara♥Love 04:05, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey. Did you get my last e-mail? Lara♥Love 15:31, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Any thoughts? A reply, perhaps. :) Lara♥Love 13:17, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Anaerobic digestion articles

Hi Ohana, thanks for grading the IC reactor article. I have put a significant amount of work into improving the anaerobic digestion article. I would appreciate if you review it and see if its rating can be improved yet or alternatively make any further suggestions for what it needs. --Alex 11:15, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks Ohana, I have added a number of references now bringing the total to 16.

Hi Ohana there are now 41 references covering the majority of the sections. Many of the references contain information that relate to the whole article but I didn't want to over reference different points. I have also reworded the statements on the potential positive impacts of AD on climate change--Alex 09:14, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Cheers Ohana, glad you think it meets the standards now--Alex 17:45, 19 August 2007 (UTC)

Thornlea Secondary School

Policy states I'm allowed to remove unsourced statements on sight. The onus is on the contributor to cite sources when adding it in. We shouldn't have to wait for the sources. The tags aren't meant to stay there forever. GreenJoe 01:41, 21 August 2007 (UTC)