User talk:OhanaUnited/Archive 6
 | This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
LOTD experiment
Now that my project is fully up and running, I though you might want to consider the four main benefits of my method over the one that you seem to be supporting:
- There is a set of orphaned articles for persons who do not have any featured lists of their own or persons that would like to take responsibility for more. Anyone can nominate such orphans. This benefits WP by getting people involved in list articles that might not have active editors to update them or defend them against vandalism. Please consider adopting one of our orphans.
- Each list will be encouraged to respond to commentary and feedback during the candidacy period, which will hopefully improve the quality of the articles.
- Articles without pictures will be encouraged to find them. E.g., List of Harry Potter films cast members had no image before its nominator added an image for this experiment. This type of thing, of course, improves the project.
- Articles are encouraged to add relevant projects to their talk page. This alerts other project to articles that they would likely have an interest in and would be able to either improve or protect.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:LOTD) 17:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)
WP:FPO
Ohana, I've done the requested actions mentioned here. Thanks for taking the time to edit and give an opinion in the discussion. Best, Rudget.talk 17:26, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
Fair use image removed - Rudget.talk 17:25, 24 November 2007 (UTC)
- I think Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Portal:North West England may have gone its course. Do you think it's got sufficient support yet?, to promote? Best, — Rudget contributions 17:47, 30 November 2007 (UTC)
My Recent Edit
Hello,
I recently editted the RuneScape article, and it was changed back. I was not trying to advertise or use wikipedia as a soapbox, I was simply adding a website to the major fansite list that needs to be added. There is no reason why only three of the major fansites can be shown. How does that help the rest of the major fansites? It's not fair that those three fansites can have that privilege while the one that I added in, which is just as good as the three listed, could be so easily turned down.
Thank you for your time. I'll keep my hands off the page until I get a response.
X Constant X —Preceding unsigned comment added by X Constant X (talk • contribs) 12:53, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
Disputed fair use rationale for Image:University of Toronto Scarborough.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:University of Toronto Scarborough.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.BetacommandBot (talk) 20:07, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
RuneScape
oh I see, thank you very much for referring me to that page! I'll use that page if I have any more concerns. —Preceding unsigned comment added by X Constant X (talk • contribs) 22:20, 26 November 2007 (UTC)
GA Sweeps
Looking at it, sounds like a good exercise! How do I sign up? I'd like to take "Middle East and the World" under "World History" as my first sweep category. Should I sign up myself or are you to do it for me? Cheers, CP 01:11, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
- I've got a question. I've fully reviewed my sweeps category and am ready to move on to the next one. Should I wait until the final three articles complete their GAR/holds before I choose another category and mark mine complete or not? Cheers, CP 02:36, 6 January 2008 (UTC)
Triple crown
Your Majesty, please come back soon for the imperial jewels. Best regards, DurovaCharge! 19:21, 27 November 2007 (UTC)
Spiffier triple crown, new awards available
Hi, I've been sprucing up the triple crown awards. Here's the new version of the standard triple crown you've already earned. Feel free to replace your old one with this if you like the new version better. I've also introduced two new triple crown awards for editors who've done a lot of triple crown work: the Napoleonic and Alexander the Great edition awards. If you're active in a WikiProject, check out the new offer for custom WikiProject triple crowns. I'll make those upon request if five or more editors qualify. See User:Durova/Triple crown winner's circle for more information. Thanks for your hard work, and cheers! DurovaCharge! 22:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)
GA newsletter
We're just about ready to go with the December issue. I'm waiting for info from Blnguyen for the GAN reviewer of the month bio, and I want SandyGeorgia to take a look at the article history part, and then it will be good to go. I would've done this a few days earlier, but I've been on the road from Arizona to Pennsylvania this week, and haven't had a chance. Thanks for your help on the newsletter! Dr. Cash 01:11, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello. I have just nominated Winston Churchill as a good article candidate. I am need of thorough and critical review by an established and respected reviewer such as yourself. If you have the time (and its a massive article) then please could you review, or at least pass it on to a user who you know will review the hell out of it. A tough review would definately be worth a barnstar! Let me know if you have the time. Thank you very much. LordHarris 10:50, 1 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi, thanks for replying so soon! On the articles talk page would be better, than other users might also be able to help/have any other thoughts etc. Thank you! LordHarris 16:08, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Re: "GA sweeps"
- We thank everyone for their interest, but only individuals selected will be invited to participate in the sweeps.
That's not really in the wiki spirit, is it? Seems to me that's never the way things should work on a wiki, and aside from "important" (as if) things like the Arbitration Committee I'm pretty sure it isn't. Example: WikiProject members aren't the only ones allowed to tag adn assess articles for that WikiProject (and even then, you can sign up by editing a page) – Gurch (talk) 08:06, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Everyone can delist a GA, so it makes sense that anyone can take part in the sweeps. Daniel 23:46, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
GA Sweeps
Hi, I was interested in joining the GA sweep project. My GA article was going to be Jupiter under planets of the solar system category.I have studied astronomy for a few years and I would appreciate it if I can help In this project. -Sparta300xps —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sparta300xps (talk • contribs) 15:42, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
Winston
Sorry about all this WC mess. It would really have helped matters if you had marked the article as under review, I think. Did you perchance begin reviewing from the end? :) Do our notes meet up in the middle? Awadewit | talk 21:44, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry OhanaUnited I thought you were not doing the GA review but that you were doing a personal peer review placing comments on the talk page! (I misinterpreted when you asked whether I would like the comments on my talk page or the article talk page - I assumed you were just doing a peer review!) I am happy to recieve both yours and Awadewit reviews and will work on both! I am happy to recieve both your GA reviews if you come to the same conclusion of hold/fail/pass. Perhaps you should both add your reviews when ready to the Churchill talk page. I know this is unorthodox but greatly appreciate both your reviews as this will greatly improve the article. Thanks, LordHarris 07:34, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you also for the invite to GA sweeps. I will make an effort to help over the coming days/weeks. Thanks for blanking that random nonsense GA page in my userspace as well! LordHarris 16:57, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, not to be rude but I am overeager with this one! I was just wondering how the review is progressing? Thank you! LordHarris 13:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
- Thank you very much! I look forward to your final review when you have some more free time. Good luck with your exam. LordHarris 19:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, not to be rude but I am overeager with this one! I was just wondering how the review is progressing? Thank you! LordHarris 13:58, 9 December 2007 (UTC)
I was going to give it a week. If no one had commented by that point, I was going to remove the tag and give it a full review. If no one can come up with a neutrality problem in a week (by December 4), then the tag can be removed.
By the way, apologies for not having done more sweeps. I got food poisoning on Tuesday night and I've been trying to catch up with work (real life and Wikipedia) ever since. Today was the first day that I had two meals in one day that didn't involve Wheat Thins! The unfortunate circumstance means that I probably won't have time to do GA Reviewing AND Sweeping until about the 20th. After that point, however, I will have PLENTY of free time to devote to Wikipedia for a good month, and Sweeping will certainly be a top priority. Should I put "temporary absence" in brackets next to my name until then? Cheers, CP 04:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
- I think it's a good idea to initially limit them. It may mean that they take a little longer, but it ensures that the quality of the rating is upheld. A lot of times I see entries that are nominated and passed within an hour, without so much as a hold, and it troubles me that similar happenings might occur during sweeps (ie. Person A takes the category with Person B's GA and passes it to avoid scrutiny). Then again, I am a cynic. The only problem is that it takes the best reviewers away from actually reviewing Good Articles, hence the large backlog, but we can always hold a backlog elimination drive after sweeps. Good luck with the exams! Cheers, CP 16:47, 3 December 2007 (UTC)
WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for December 2007
The December 2007 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter has been published. Comments are welcome on this, as well as suggestions or offers of assistance for the January 2008 issue. Dr. Cash 01:08, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
re:sweeps and the newsletter
Hey Ohana, I just wanted you to know that I might be up for joining the sweeps. I've got strong experience (a full list of my GA reviews is at my userpage), and I have listed a few articles at GA/R as part of a personal sweep. Anyway, I've fallen behind this week as I'm working on an article for the core contest, but after the ninth (or possibly before) I'll be back in business with GA as my main focus. Let me know if you need my help, VanTucky talk 19:19, 4 December 2007 (UTC)
- First off, thank you for the invitation. I've started a tally for myself at the running total page in anticipation of some reviewing. As to the newsletter, if I think of anything to do I'll suggest it, but I really just meant to point out that I was inquiring about sweeps because of the newsletter notice. Thanks again, and hopefully I can be a helpful asset to the sweeping effort. VanTucky talk 02:27, 5 December 2007 (UTC)
Is it time this is passed? Thanks in advance. — Rudget speak.work 20:20, 6 December 2007 (UTC)
GA Sweeps project
Yes, I am interested in helping out on this; I can definitely help on the tv eps and video games and probably other ares too. --MASEM 04:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
RFA nomination
Hmm. Thank you! Erm.... I guess so. I suppose it is a bit busy at RFA at the moment. It may also be advisable that I have already had an RFA in October to which I've provided a analysis. Best, — Rudget speak.work 17:14, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hehe. God, I know. After that answer was posted, I quickly turned from biting nails to eating fist. :) — Rudget speak.work 17:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are a few, that deserve mention anyway. I always ensure that my responses to other editors, even in the face of disruption and chaos, are civil and assume good faith. Hopefully, this ascertains my civil record, and clean block log. I have also been quite a frequent contributor to the help desk recently and have since been made an admin on the HelpWiki (link provided on my userpage). I would hopefully utilise this and use my experience on the revert rule noticeboard, where I would use my experience (even if slightly incorrect in doing so) in one case, which involved two users reverting each other's actions on a royalty article, which had grown massively from an AFD comment. Then, there is CAT:CSD. I have a strong want to be able to have the opportunity to work there, I can't view my deleted edits, but I believe I've got a reasonable amount of pages that I've requested for deletion and a substantial number of edits to AFD discussions. Considering my edits at SSP, I would also like to work there, acknowledging that all cases posted by me have been successful, and hopefully applying this knowledge to ANI if there's a suspected case. I would also like to work at WP:RFP, where I know what should be protected and what shouldn't, considering my 10 requests there since July. I should also be working in the GAN area, where I have currently reviewed around 10 articles (not much experience I know, but still none-the-less, none have been disputed). I know you don't need admin tools for this section of work, but it come in handy when a GAN comes up and there may be a possible 3RR violation, in which case I would use my participation at AN3 to help me decide what to do. You may also see from the "Wannabe-kate" tool that I have quite a high-number of edits at WP:CHU, but from the end of November I resigned, citing my incompetence as the main reason. You may see the section regarding this, here. I may also like to advise you that I've been subject to two DRV's which were a result of improper closes, on my behalf, which resulted in two reviews, viewable here & here. Hopefully, that's all you need to know. Thanks once again! :) Best, — Rudget speak.work 17:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
- So have you had time to review it all? :) — Rudget speak.work 18:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hmm. I've had a review of this rather short conversation, and I've decided to now decline this nomination, and wait for another at the end of January. You may do a co-nom then, that's if I get nominated though :) All the best, — Rudget Contributions 17:30, 13 December 2007 (UTC)
- So have you had time to review it all? :) — Rudget speak.work 18:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- Well, there are a few, that deserve mention anyway. I always ensure that my responses to other editors, even in the face of disruption and chaos, are civil and assume good faith. Hopefully, this ascertains my civil record, and clean block log. I have also been quite a frequent contributor to the help desk recently and have since been made an admin on the HelpWiki (link provided on my userpage). I would hopefully utilise this and use my experience on the revert rule noticeboard, where I would use my experience (even if slightly incorrect in doing so) in one case, which involved two users reverting each other's actions on a royalty article, which had grown massively from an AFD comment. Then, there is CAT:CSD. I have a strong want to be able to have the opportunity to work there, I can't view my deleted edits, but I believe I've got a reasonable amount of pages that I've requested for deletion and a substantial number of edits to AFD discussions. Considering my edits at SSP, I would also like to work there, acknowledging that all cases posted by me have been successful, and hopefully applying this knowledge to ANI if there's a suspected case. I would also like to work at WP:RFP, where I know what should be protected and what shouldn't, considering my 10 requests there since July. I should also be working in the GAN area, where I have currently reviewed around 10 articles (not much experience I know, but still none-the-less, none have been disputed). I know you don't need admin tools for this section of work, but it come in handy when a GAN comes up and there may be a possible 3RR violation, in which case I would use my participation at AN3 to help me decide what to do. You may also see from the "Wannabe-kate" tool that I have quite a high-number of edits at WP:CHU, but from the end of November I resigned, citing my incompetence as the main reason. You may see the section regarding this, here. I may also like to advise you that I've been subject to two DRV's which were a result of improper closes, on my behalf, which resulted in two reviews, viewable here & here. Hopefully, that's all you need to know. Thanks once again! :) Best, — Rudget speak.work 17:47, 7 December 2007 (UTC)
France Portal - Featured Portal!
I just wanted to thank you and the others who helped improve and get Portal:France "featured portal" status. Thanks - NYArtsnWords (talk) 00:02, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
GA sweeps
Hello! Do you have anyone to take care of the medicine-related good articles? I'd be interested. How does the process work? NCurse work 13:31, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Some examples:
NCurse work 18:49, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
- I'm sorry for the long silence, the reason is my exam period. So I'm still interested in your project and I don't think using a template could cause me any trouble. Happy new year! NCurse work 21:31, 31 December 2007 (UTC)
No problemo... I'll put this in the job queue... As soon as it's done with the current batch from Biography project I'll put your request in. SkierRMH (talk) 19:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)
Thank you for your vote on my RfA
Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of 41/0/1.
Please accept a slice of panettone as an expression of my gratitude. Feel free to help yourself to some chocolate zabaglione as well.
I am humbled by the trust placed in me to use the tools wisely.
|
|
Really, really bad haikus from a new admin
Setting new lows in thank-you spam:
Janitor's new tools
Spam must stop -- will new mop act?
Ooops, .com blocked
New admin, new tools
Earnest newbie furrows brow
Fare thee well Main Page
New mess all about
Sorcerer's Apprentice mop
Not supporter's fault
A. B. so grateful
Wikipedia trembles
Watch out DRV
A. B. wonders why
Copyright always confused
Fair use, farewell, bye
Qatar is blocked
Shucks those range blocks are tricky!
Will get it straight soon.
Colbert's elephants
stampede Wikipedia
Must protect, protect
Wiki fortress not.
Open gates, knowledge wings free
But fiends are about
Dear RfA friend,
I will learn, chaos will fade
Thanks so much ... A. B.
Andrew, thanks so much for your support; I look forward to living up to your and others' trust and expectations.
--A. B. (talk) 23:25, 12 December 2007 (UTC)
Seasons Greetings
Many thanks, Ohana, for the thoughtful barnstar. Really appreciate it. I'm in the middle of assessing some unassessed environment articles at present and will continue with that soon. I also wanted to take this opportunity to wish you and your family a safe and happy Christmas and New Year... Johnfos (talk) 08:01, 16 December 2007 (UTC)
Featured portal candidates
Since my introduction to the FPOC page last month, I've got involved with a few FPOCs. And I was wondering, can any user promote a candidate when consensus is apparent? Regards, Rt. 13:26, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hehe, quite. Happy birthday. Shame you didn't tell anyone! :) Best, Rt. 17:18, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
Hello! I see you promoted the above portal yesterday, so just to say thanks. I think you forgot to remove the transclusion from WP:FPOC by the way, so I went ahead and did so myself. I hope that's okay. Many thanks, Chris.B (talk) 15:39, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- I noticed the whole featured portals thing was a fair bit disorganised. I don't even want go into featured sounds, that was beyond repair the last time I checked. :)
- Seeing as I regularly close featured picture noms, I wouldn't mind lending a hand when it comes to closing and so forth. So if you ever need any help feel free to give me a shout.
- My only concern is that I think we ought to be transcluding the nomination into the archive as opposed to actually "substituting" it. I know for a fact that that is what is done over at WP:FPC and if I'm not mistaken, used to be done. (See Wikipedia:Featured portal candidates/Failed log/July 2007 for instance)
- Your ideas sound good to me, anything to instil an organised procedure is well worth the input. In the meantime I think I'll create an equivalent to {{FPCresult}} for portals – that template is seriously useful! Chris.B (talk) 18:13, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
- Ha! You may be thinking of Chris G? I think he has a bot.
- Your template looks great, I think Rudget was using something similar if I'm not mistaken. I've added a note to the instructions section regarding the use of the {{FPCresult}} template which should prove rather useful. All the best and Merry Christmas! Chris.B (talk) 21:47, 19 December 2007 (UTC)
Bot
As much as I would love to create a bot, I have absolutely no idea how to go about it. The instructions at Wikipedia:Creating a bot are rather inscrutable, and all I can garner from it is that I need to know some programming language, which unfortunately I don't. I suggest you consider asking User:Cobi who created the famous ClueBot if I'm not mistaken. Otherwise I really have no idea. Chris.B (talk) 10:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- I see Cobi wasn't able to provide assistance with such a bot. After Christmas I'll ask User:Dschwen who created QICbot over at Commons. The bot is in charge of processing "Quality image" nominations, pretty much the same as what we want. Chris.B (talk) 14:10, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Good evening. Thank you very much for taking the time to do such an extensive and careful review. I have begun to address your comments and points, but it will take me several days to resolve them all. I should be finished by the weekend. As for the external links, I'm in favour of keeping them all, but then again I am biased towards the most possible information on Churchill available. Could you perhaps help me on this point and remove those external links you do not think are suitable/needed/relevant for the article? Your assistance on this is greatly valued. Thank you again. LordHarris 18:47, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, I believe I have addressed your comments, improved the references, style etc, added more of them and clarified some sentances. I have responded to your concerns. Please rereview the article and see if it meets GA. Once again I am deeply thankful for your time and effort on this. Kind regards, LordHarris 12:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Ohana, just wondered if you had time to see if Churchill meets GA now? I hope you had a merry Chirstmas/holiday time. Did it snow in Canada this holiday season? LordHarris 17:06, 29 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hello, I believe I have addressed your comments, improved the references, style etc, added more of them and clarified some sentances. I have responded to your concerns. Please rereview the article and see if it meets GA. Once again I am deeply thankful for your time and effort on this. Kind regards, LordHarris 12:37, 22 December 2007 (UTC)
NOT Merging WikiProjects + Al Gore + climate solutions
NOT Merging WikiProjects
Hi, there is a proposal to merge inactive WikiProject (Wikipedia:WikiProject Climate change and Wikipedia:WikiProject Energy development) into WikiProject Environment. Please voice your opinions. OhanaUnitedTalk page 14:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)
I Strongly disagree. These are very simular projects, but there are many differences. THis 3 projects are good at this versions.--Tamás Kádár (talk) 10:30, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Al Gore + climate solutions
"I was just wondering whether you think this project can be salvaged and new life put into it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Seddon69 (talk • contribs) 15:01, 29 October 2007 (UTC)"
- I think we have to write some article about the solutions with a lot of details. We should edit the Al Gore article, to develope , to finish to Feature article. (Bali conference)--Tamás Kádár (talk) 10:25, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Nancy Reagan
I would like to thank you and whomever else was involved in the decision to place Nancy Reagan on Wikipedia's main page for December 24. I've worked extensively on the article, got it promoted to GA and finally FA; it is a personal accomplishment for me to soon be able to see that article on the main page. I am curious as to how it was chosen, however. Thanks so much, Happyme22 (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
P.S. - I also got her husband, President Ronald Reagan, to FA back in August and plan on nominating it for the main page on February 6 (the anniversary of his birthday). Do I just place it here sometime during January? Thanks again, Happyme22 (talk) 17:39, 23 December 2007 (UTC)
Powderfinger
I and a few others have been working on Portal:Powderfinger, and since you're extensively involved in portals, I'd really appreciate your opinion on what can be done. The limited scope is a problem that I don't think can be solved properly (and Selected picture is the place most hard hit), but I think that the portal as a whole is doing well. I'd appreciate any comments of yours :) Spebi 04:50, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Ohana, I hope you don't mind, but in order to reduce the bureaucracy sort of "voting" style to elect a small group of featured portal directors, I've added a note under the main poll header about what the poll isn't, and changed the "Votes in support of Candidate #1" to simply "Comments", as separate sections aren't really necessary. I really hope you don't mind, I'm just trying to make this look less like a VIP-only group and turn out MfD'ed twice like the BAG, and have the small group of directors listed on a small part of the page under "Helpful FPORT users" – this will work fine I think, and I'm sure that anyone wanting to be considered should be sensible enough not to want the job for the sake of a userbox or the title. Spebi 01:18, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
Hey there, thanks for the note and positive comments :) I was also glad to see your proposal re. an FPoC director - as I said in your RfA, you have my support in this field, and I have commented accordingly. However, I'd prefer if you didn't close FPoC discussions (if chosen as director) which you've given commentary in. Anyways, good luck, and cheers, — Dihydrogen Monoxide (Review) 23:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)
Well...
... if you insist. [1] :) Chris.B (talk) 21:15, 25 December 2007 (UTC)
For being....
|
The Original Barnstar | |
| ...one of the most civil and courteous editors around here. Your edits are simply fantastic, and carry on with the great work at GAC and FPOC. Rt. 16:38, 27 December 2007 (UTC) |
Articles/Portals worked extensively – Portal:Sustainable development
I must be missing something here. Would you mind clarifying for me the nature of your extensive work on Portal:Sustainable development? RichardF (talk) 04:30, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Wikimania Toronto 2009
Sorry for my late reply, plz tell me in my my zh.wikip talk page if any help needed..... :p --JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 15:37, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
ops...you mean I should sign into OT members rather than I support? --JéRRy.雨雨.talk.hk 15:39, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
Churchill
Thank you OhanaUnited for the GA. I assume that you meant this article is now GA and not this article is not GA!?
|
The Reviewers Award | |
| For your extensive GA review of Winston Churchill. Wikipedia saltutes your excellence as a reviewer! Thank you. LordHarris 10:25, 30 December 2007 (UTC) |
Self-nom
Hi OhanaUnited,
On my RFA, -Sharkface217 wrote on neutral that "I don't really like self-noms very much" -- is this a legitimate reason? Also please voice your opinion on my RFA if possible! Ohmpandya (Talk) 02:42, 31 December 2007 (UTC)