Jump to content

User talk:Backslash Forwardslash/Archive 2

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
⁂ Main Talk - Archives: 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 ⁂
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5

DYK Main Page hits contest

Hi Backslash Forwardslash. Per the results of DYK Main Page hits contest, I started a draft article at User:Suntag/Train melody. I listed some research links on the talk page, so it is likely that you can find some reference info to add to the draft article. -- Suntag ☼ 18:34, 1 December 2008 (UTC)

One of your DYK moves to the next update

Hello, I saw you moved this nomination of mine to the next update. You added the hook that wasn't sourced properly. You should have added the alt hook that we decided was good, which was the one I just replaced. Next time, look for the alt hook if there is one, and read each discussion of a DYK nomination. When you removed it, you should say there was a bit of discussion going on about which hook would be best. If you read it carefully, you'll see the alt hook that was decided that was good. Thank you. – RyanCross (talk) 01:14, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'm happy you understand. :-) – RyanCross (talk) 23:07, 2 December 2008 (UTC)

GA Pass

Thanks very much for the review of Poohsticks. I know it's a particularly unimportant and peculiar topic but that's what attracted me in the first place! As far as FA goes I think it's best staying as a Good Article as it isn't a widely researched topic. Thank you for your time. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 00:27, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Samford

lol, syncronised reversions. --smadge1 (talk) 07:22, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

diff --smadge1 (talk) 07:38, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

Singlish

The page needs protection from anymore vandalism. Vernon (Versus22) (talk) 07:24, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I've submitted a request as WP:RPP. \ / (⁂) 07:25, 3 December 2008 (UTC)

I am sorry

Hi \/ its me that guy you got blocked just before, I am sorry for being rude to you and calling that other person an idiot, I love wikipedia and realize i should have never said and did what i did, please accept my appology. please could you speak to one of the admins and get me unblocked i would really like to make a new account, again please forgive me for being rude im sorry. —Preceding unsigned comment added by DrakeLuvenstein (talk • contribs)

DrakeLuvenstein (talk) has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!

Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Hi \ /, once again I would like to say sorry for yesterday and I realize that you were just following Wikipedia's policies and trying to make it a better, and for that heres a cookie :) I hope that one day we can become friends, Wiki for Life! cheers. (DrakeLuvenstein (talk) 19:24, 4 December 2008 (UTC))

Request

Danite123 (talk) 23:31, 3 December 2008 (UTC)Hi there, I’m researching an article about Wikipedia, and its editors. I wonder if you I could talk to you about Wikipedia, and how you use it, for a magazine about not-for-profit organisations. If you could spare some time and wouldn’t mind answering some questions by email or phone, please contact me on Bennett.d@hotmail.co.uk, or leave a message here or on my talk page. Many thanks,

Daniel

Re: Wondering if you could help

I'm sorry, I'm currently copy editing a fairly long article and have another waiting for me. I've asked Tanankyo to take a look at it. He's great at improving prose. Good luck! momoricks make my day 23:57, 4 December 2008 (UTC)

db-g1

Hey, I saw you tag a page for db-g1 a while ago, but it probably has since been deleted, so I can't link it. Anyways, as WP:G1 states, that tag is only for patent nonsense, or a string of incoherent text like "wqetfghvbzsndf". If it is any way coherent, even if the page is vandalism, the page no longer falls under g1 and must be deleted under another tag. I thought I'd just let you know, as it's a pet peeve of many new page patrollers (myself included). Thanks for your effort and hard work, and keep up the Huggling! DARTH PANDAduel 04:46, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I can't quite remember what the page actually was, but I had probably meant to tag is as g3. But, my hand-eye coordination being what it is, I clicked the wrong line. :) Apologies for the inconvenience. \ / (⁂) 05:05, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Not a problem at all. I'm known to mess up pretty big on Huggle too (incidentally, just a few days ago, I almost got someone blocked for removing the Trans-Siberian Orchestra infobox from some small unrelated band's page because he never wrote a reason when he removed it and I kept warning him for content removal, blithely ignoring the fact that he was in fact reverting vandalism...). Anyways, thanks for listening to (or rather, reading) my rant and random stories! DARTH PANDAduel 05:09, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Yournumbertwofan vandal

This guy seems to have a thing for blanking the user page of anyone who gives him a warning. So keep your eyes open for the next couple minutes, because you might be next.

The good news is the moment he does that it'll be vandalism after his final warning, and I already have a little blurb typed up for AIV...I'm just waiting to hit "save." —Politizer talk/contribs 06:44, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

Clewer Mill Stream DYK

Hi, I saw that you recently added this nomination to the next queu. When I confirmed it as a "More interesting hook", I was actualy refering to the alternative hook. I haven't actualy checked the referencing for the first hook, which is the one you added. I've decided to change the hook that you put into the next update. Please let me know, if there's something you know, which I don't. Thanks, Jolly Ω Janner 16:55, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

I believe you are referring to this edit? I have no problems in you changing the hook - I just didn't notice anything in your comment that referred to which hook was verified, so I assumed that you had verified both. Sorry for the misunderstanding. For my benefit and that of the other DYK 'loaders' (I hate that word ;) ), just be sure that you mention which hook you verified. Something like: "ALT1 verified - more interesting." will help decrease the ambiguity. In any case, thanks for verifying hooks, you are doing a great job. \ / (⁂) 20:41, 5 December 2008 (UTC)
Thanks, I'll remember that for next time. Jolly Ω Janner 21:20, 5 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Train melody

Updated DYK query On 7 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Train melody, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 03:53, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Mistake?

Hi, \ /! I think this is a mistaken revert? The editor has apparently tried to add some more humorous content to a humour page. Cheers. Chamal talk 14:34, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I've never come across those 'humour' pages before - I assumed by the title it was a serious policy page. Reading it now - it clearly isn't. Sorry. \ / (⁂) 20:09, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
:O You've never seen a humor page? The shame! :D Try WP:EfD. —Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 20:12, 7 December 2008 (UTC)

Not every IP is a vandal

Hi, i noticed your actions against the edits by an IP user (121.217.142.47) on the page Lieutenant Governor of New South Wales (Here), your revert appeared not to be necessary and the IPs edit appeared to be constructive. So in future i ask you to be a bit more careful. Please use this page for future reference: Not every IP is a vandal.

cheers Stravin (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2008 (UTC)


200 GA drive for WP:AUS

Hi there \/. Grahamec gave me your name as a recent producer of a Australian GA - Damien Kingsbury. Well, we're within striking distance of 200 GAs at the moment and we decided to have a go at getting to 200 by the end of the year or Australia Day, same as the 100 drive last year. Hope to see you there at WP:AWNB/A and WP:AWNB ! YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 05:32, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I might try and find an Australian article to get to soon, I'm currently working on another project at the moment however. \ / (⁂) 05:37, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Garden Gnomes dyk nom

Hey \/, I noticed you commented at the Garden Gnomes Liberationists nomination about how the article is at AfD... that is true right now (I'm the one who brought it there), but it's looking like it's already guaranteed to be closed as keep. Personally I still think the article has a lot of problems with tone, etc. (although Cbl52 and ChildofMidnight have made herculean efforts cleaning up most of those problems), which might bar it from DYK, but it's not my place to comment. Anyway, I have chosen not to edit DYK pages for a little while, so I'm just leaving you this message to let you know. Hope all is well, —Politizer talk/contribs 05:31, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

No worries, when the AfD is passed I'm sure that the nomination will be updated. I just wanted to note that so editors don't waste their time verifying a hook that really shouldn't be verified until after the AfD has been closed. \ / (⁂) 05:36, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, please return to DYK soon. :) \ / (⁂) 05:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)
(ec) Ok, that's a good idea. Thanks for keeping an eye out. —Politizer talk/contribs 05:38, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

Internet Safety

If you really are 4 years old, I say you talk to your parents about internet safety and remove that userbox that says you are 4 years old. There are people on Wikipedia that prey on children. They act like they are going to be your friend and they may say to meet them somewhere. Then they do the worst they could possibly do. Kidnap. Carabera (talk) 13:20, 13 December 2008 (UTC) contribs) 12:59, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

If you really believe I'm four years old you shouldn't be on the internet. ;) \ / (⁂) 13:02, 11 December 2008 (UTC)

MS Hans Hedtoft

Has this article been expanded enough to nom for DYK? Mjroots (talk) 09:47, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, there is no issues with the length of the expansion. In order to qualify as a 'new' article, the amount of characters must be expanded five times. Before you're expansion, the article was 494 characters, and it is now 3065 characters, well past the 2470 that would be needed. If you have any questions regarding this, please let me know. :) \ / (⁂) 10:33, 12 December 2008 (UTC)

Prose size

Providing you with this link in case you don't know about it: User talk:Dr pda/prosesize.js, as it is very useful. (In one FAC recently, the formatted references were more kilobytes than the prose size (text only)!) You can stick the script in your monobook.js. If you don't use IE, then the image part doesn't work but you can use Website Optimization.com for the images. Forgive me, if you already know all this stuff! Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 01:29, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

I have it, use it, and love it. Works great in Google Chrome. I'm just staying neutral on the issue that it should be used at DYK. I was just trying to point out to O.R that by using it Politizer wasn't trying to decrease the count. Personally, I think it should be the standard, but Ottava has made a point DYK shouldn't necessarily ignore. \ / (⁂ | ※) 01:57, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Just hate to see this issue grow. I will be sad if we have to fall back on "rules" at DYK. But the day will probably come, sooner rather than later! I have great respect for Politizer. —Mattisse (Talk) 04:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
As I pointed out on the talk page, I just realized that Dr Pda's own statement about what is prose contradicts what Politizer, Gato, etc have been saying that it is. This needs to be remedied immediately. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:20, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Improper closure

You closed a proposal discussion. This is a very serious issue and it is up at Village Pump Proposals. You are negating the guidelines at consensus by closing it before even 24 hours. This is extremely improper. Either you revert your action, or this will be reverted as negating the proper format of consensus. This is clearly not SNOW, as there are at least two supports within the first 6 hours. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:10, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Ottava. I'm not trying to shut down your proposal prematurely. I was trying to allow you to get past the comments that were not even relevant to the proposal. The discussion has once again resolved to petty insults, so I've set up a poll so that we can gauge the consensus through a clearer focus. The poll isn't formal, or going to have an influence on any rule changes, just it will demonstrate to others what the consensus actually is. \ / (⁂ | ※) 21:24, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
It still doesn't need to be archived. Talk pages rarely have closed discussion. When its an issue about cliquish behavior or negating standard procedures, its bad to suddenly close things. Thank you for putting together a straw poll. Now, we need to make sure that it gets more than a few hours to stay open based on standard consensus. After just a few hours yesterday, Politizer was already demanding it be closed. Can you add to the poll the contrary idea (and state that it is the contrary idea) of adopting the "unwritten rules"? Ottava Rima (talk) 22:09, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
There you go again with your incorrect accusations, Ottava. Look here. Agne and Mattisse both suggested closure before I ever did. Again, I'm flattered to see that you have eyes only for me, but you have to try to remember that there are other editors out there as well. —Politizer talk/contribs 22:12, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Added. I don't see any point in closing this one in a day. Civility seems to have reappeared, and I made a post at the Village Pump. Might be best to have a break and see how this pans out. \ / (⁂ | ※) 22:45, 14 December 2008 (UTC)


I responded to your comment about Lives page - the point is "new" being used to claim that only "new text" added to a page counts, which would discount blockquotes, quotes, and text from other pages. The idea of allowing in blockquotes would be to accept the others also. Blockquotes are currently not counted by Dr Pda, but should be, and are the one people are mostly likely to not see as "prose". Thus, by accepting blockquotes, the rest are unchallengable. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:48, 16 December 2008 (UTC)


The issue is at Village Pump, and the point was to get more than "Village Pump regulars" to chime in. Why? Because this goes on the main page, and very few people realize that there is even a conversation at the WP:DYK talk page. There are hundreds of admin affected by changes, because they watch the main page. Ask Kim Bruning about how long a consensus should run. He is an expert with consensus building and processes. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:31, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Mattisse and Politizer

Both of these two users are disrupting the poll with 100% falsity. Dr Pda's sheet clearly says:

Here - "his method is not perfect however and may include text which isn't prose (eg in navboxes), or exclude text which is (eg in Cquote, or prose written in bullet-point form"
and "The text counted as prose is highlighted in yellow, so it is easy to see whether the prose size is over or underestimated."

This clearly states that text in quotes must be counted manually and do count as part of the prose according to the device, and that technical limitations are the only reason why this is not done automatically. Thus, they are trying to manipulate people into thinking that Dr Pda does not believe that quotes count as prose. This is extremely improper. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:22, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

That doesn't say anything about counting manually; it just says that prosesize.js doesn't count quotes. You can interpret that to mean you need to count quotes manually, or you can interpret that to mean quotes aren't counted. No one's doing anything "improper." Mattisse and I have been clarifying things for some users who don't have prosesize.js and are under the impression that it automatically counts blockquotes. —Politizer talk/contribs 23:32, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Since there does seem to be some confusion, I added a note explaining that while his tool may not count block quotes, he has an opinion and it can be read at his talk page. You can fix the link if you'd like. I don't believe Mattisse and Politizer were trying to manipulate anyone, they were trying to clear up confusion. \ / (⁂ | ※) 23:34, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Constantly saying that dr pda doesn't count blockquotes is patently wrong. He does count them, he just states that his device doesn't include them but includes others because of a flaw. To pounce on such a flaw and to act as if it is proper is completely unethical. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:41, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
Buddy, I didn't say anything about Dr pda himself; I was talking about his tool. Look: "PDA tool doesn't include block quotes." Gatoclass has already said this to you, but you really need to stop escalating everything and calling other users unethical, absurd, or questionable the moment they disagree with you. —Politizer talk/contribs 23:44, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
The actual tool also includes things that are not prose. That is why there is a section saying what to add and what not to add. How can you keep on going about this when it is obvious that Dr Pda defines it as prose? Ottava Rima (talk) 23:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Backslash - Could you note that the Readability tool does include blockquotes as prose? Dr Pda is only one tool, and is not official in anyway. Ottava Rima (talk) 23:53, 14 December 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. Now Mattisse is adding his own notes. This is becoming a mockery. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
The note was already removed. —Politizer talk/contribs 01:23, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
According to your diff, a large portion of his note was left. Politizer, why do you always say something and your evidence shows something quite different? Do you not even look at it first? It clearly still says: "Note however, that Dr. pda is neither an expert in FAC criteria nor in DYK criteria. In any event, FAC criteria do not equal DYK criteria. He is merely describing his tool. —Mattisse (Talk) 00:09, 15 December 2008 (UTC)". This is completely unnecessary and put forth by an involved party. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:36, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
Consensus on that page was that you were starting problems and that at least 5 people wished that you would butt out. It seems like you have only moved on to the next place. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:57, 15 December 2008 (UTC)
"Consensus on that page was that you were starting problems and that at least 5 people wished that you would butt out." Funny, I can think of a totally different person and page this statement would apply to right now! Can you guess who it is?  :-D —Politizer talk/contribs 04:41, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Ottava Rima

Just tired of having Mattisse and Politizer flashed around at every post and thought I would change the subject. —Mattisse (Talk) 02:30, 15 December 2008 (UTC)

Oops

Re this — sorry, I was hurrying to add the links before I got into another edit conflict and I totally screwed up! Thanks for cleaning up after me! Best, —Politizer talk/contribs 03:45, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Credit mistake

I just went through my recent DYK credits and found five December 2008 writing credits that should have been nomination credits. The five were (i) Careysburg, Liberia, (ii) David Ross (businessman), (iii) Taping River, (iv) California Avocado Commission, and (v) Eugene Goodman. I traced down Careysburg, Liberia (it took a while). This diff shows that I was listed as a nominator for Careysburg, Liberia. This diff shows the move of the information to the Next update template put me as a maker via {{DYKmake|Careysburg, Liberia|Suntag}}. It should have read {{DYKnom|Careysburg, Liberia|Suntag}}. This seems to be a significant problem as it is a mistake anybody can make in moving hooks from the suggestion page to the Next update page. I'll post on the DYK talk page to see if someone can come up with a fix (perhaps a bot check). -- Suntag ☼ 22:09, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Replied there \ / (⁂ | ※) 23:36, 16 December 2008 (UTC)

Australia Day

Good job with the article -- Samir 03:54, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. It never ceases to amaze me how important topics go unnoticed. I did my bit, YellowMonkey has been great cleaning it up... hopefully GA status isn't too far away. \ / (⁂ | ※) 03:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi YellowMonkey. I recently improved the Australia Day article, and I was hoping you could very quickly run through it and give some informal feedback before I nominate it as a Good Article. \ / (⁂ | ※) 03:34, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Yes, I've given it a run through. I guess the level of detail will pass for GA, but I doubt it would hurt to go into more detail. It does seem to cover all the stuff I would expect, ie, history basis from 1788, and government edicts, Aboriginal objections and preferences for Anzac Day and the Aus of the Year. Also I am wondering why single quotes and double quote marks are used. Apart from that it's ok, and probably the expansion to make things safe and to lay a good foundation for further work and I've fixed some formatting. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 04:22, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I'm a bit worried about Indymedia. Isn't that a fringe source for greenleftweekly/socialist alliance type folks with a strong polemic bent? YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:11, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
I have them cited because it simply shows that there are people that have that viewpoint. I don't think I've been bias in the text, certainly not in favour of there opinions anyway. \ / (⁂ | ※) 08:37, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

DYK for Cyrille Pierre Théodore Laplace

Updated DYK query On 18 December, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Cyrille Pierre Théodore Laplace, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

BorgQueen (talk) 05:16, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review 3 (Odexed)

Thanks for assisting in the improvement for the article Odex's actions against file-sharing, and please accept my apologies for the previous lack of response and edits due to dealing with real-life issues. I'm pleased to let you know that the third PR for the article is now up, and looking forward to hearing feedback from you so that it can be brought over to FAC soon. - Best regards, Mailer Diablo 22:56, 18 December 2008 (UTC)

Hi Mailer. I'm sort of occupied with a few other tasks at the moment, although I can recommend that you speak to Tanankyo (talk · contribs). Tanankyo is a fantastic copyeditor, and I think he'll be able to provide you with a lot more quality reviewing that I could. \ / (⁂ | ※) 01:33, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Updated DYK template

Hi, I'd just like to let you know what the template {{DYKsug}} was just updated with a new feature: now, for all DYK nominations that include only one article, it auto-generates the credit templates ({{DYKmake}} and {{DYKnom}}), which the person moving the hook to Next may simply cut and past from T:TDYK directly into next. This only happens with single-article nominations; if the nomination has more than one article, there will be a message in the template saying "Credits must be done manually by the person moving this nomination to Next" or something like that. It will probably be a few days before you start seeing the auto-generated credit templates, since the template was only just updated and only the new nominations will reflect it; the first several times you see auto-generated credit templates, you may want to double-check the nom as you are promoting it, just to make sure the credits are correct.

There have been some other minor changes—mainly, now if a DYK nominator lists himself as both "creator/expander" and "nominator," the "nominator" field ends up blank (so that what gets displayed is "Created by User, self nom" rather than "Created by User, nominated by User." Also, the fields, |collaborator=, |collaborator2=, and |collaborator3= have been replaced with the more intuitive |creator2=, |creator3=, and |creator4=.

Please let me know if you experience any problems with the new template. —Politizer talk/contribs 15:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

Cool. As soon as a few nominations flow through I'll tell you how it goes. \ / (⁂ | ※) 20:31, 19 December 2008 (UTC)

re: Little help?

already looking - just working through this at the moment - Peripitus (Talk) 08:26, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Tomorrow's MP balance

I've put back a couple of hooks since the balance can always be adjusted by removing entries from WP:ITN. Thanks for your work. --BorgQueen (talk) 13:13, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Moumouni

I was always under the impression that if an article was as good as it could be (albeit short) it could attain GA status, FA if longer. Anyway, Moumouni is not ready for GA yet, though when I feel it is I'll notify you. BTW would you mind reviewing its "parent" article, Hubert Maga, or contribute to the peer review? ~the editorofthewiki (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 22:07, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

Hello. I was referring to criteria 3a and 3b, regarding the broadness in coverage. While it doesn't need to cover everything that ever happened to him, there is a lot missing. In the early life section, there is a gap of about 40 years. Information that would be pertinent would be his schooling, political background, how he came to be a presidential candidate, etc. The article then waits 30 years again until he retires. I pointed you towards those books because I wanted to make sure that you didn't miss any valuable sources that might give you a little more padding to add to the article. In regards to being the best an article could be, I would agree that within reason, that principle should be applied, I only have reservations about whether this article is as 'good as it can be'. I can appreciate the difficulty of finding offline sources, so if you are still unable to add anything at all to the article, I, or the next reviewer, will take that into account. » \ / (⁂ | ※) 23:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)
Also, I have left a few comments on the Hubert Maga Peer Review page. » \ / (⁂ | ※) 23:32, 20 December 2008 (UTC)

I;ve expanded the Moumouni article a little. It really is terribly to difficult to write about something like a Beninese physician in great detail. A google search shows up only 10 hits and google books ans scholar even less. I daresay there is more information on him somewhere in a book in French, probably quite a lot, or a lot of information from the journals he has published on the nature of his work etc. If we can make it as comprehensive as possible this will stand a better chance. I;ve tried to balance out coverage of his life The Bald One White cat 11:26, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration

You added my Barack Obama 2009 presidential inauguration article that was created on the 19th to the next queue on the 20th. I was hoping to have 3 or 4 more days to clean this up for the main page. Can you slide it back to the talk page?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

I'm unable to edit the queues, as I'm not an admin. Try contacting User:BorgQueen or User:Gatoclass. » \ / (⁂ | ※) 09:31, 21 December 2008 (UTC)
Done. --BorgQueen (talk) 09:39, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hi there, I completed a small peer review for you here. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 16:49, 21 December 2008 (UTC)

Happy First Day Of Winter!


The Mansion of Happiness

I wanted to let you know The Mansion of Happiness passed its GA review. Thank you greatly for your initial review and encouragement in preparing the article for a second review! ItsLassieTime (talk) 06:21, 23 December 2008 (UTC)

Australia Day

Well done. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:43, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

BF, my very best wishes for the festive season stay safe and talk to you in 2009.--VS talk 11:50, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

Sure

Sure do you have lessons/tasks I can do?I want to learn the basics as I have told some well-known people I know I will help improve their articles.--Lotsofinterviews (talk) 13:13, 24 December 2008 (UTC)

MC-1 bomb

I copied the hook to the template without first adding the checkmark, but I did mention in my edit summary that I verified it. Would you consider including the hook in the next update? It would be a shame to lose a perfectly good hook because a misunderstanding between us made it go stale. - Mgm|(talk) 10:31, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

There is certainly no reason why the hook shouldn't be added, but indeed there is no rush. Most hooks are picked from the expiring section and most, if not all, are verified eventually. I would've left it except I had a few reservations about the length of the article and was hoping another reviewer could look over it again. Since there was no shortage of verified hooks, I didn't think there would be an issue. Feel free to verify it yourself, many people prepare the Next Update and I'm sure another reviewer will be able to make the decision. Sorry for the inconvenience. » \ / (⁂ | ※) 11:34, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

Adoption Graduation

The Adoptee Graduation Diploma
Glad I was able to help. Thanks for being my first adoptee!
~SunDragon34 (talk) 17:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

(Sorry I took so long to get back to you. I was occupied IRW over the holidays, and sort of took an unofficial wikibreak. See you around!) ~SunDragon34 (talk) 17:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

How much more info is needed

for an DYK for Joachim Winterlich. The Rolling Camel (talk) 18:08, 6 January 2009 (UTC)

yes i would like adotion

OK

I will take your advice, but i guess everybody who recently made a new account is should welcomed by a welcome message to introducing while their are maybe a bad wikipedian in the future.  CHJL  Discuss 07:03, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Oh yeah, i know that, i feel so sorry about that because of my reckles to pick a welcome message. But today i've sent a correct message.  CHJL  Discuss 07:05, 8 January 2009 (UTC)

Welcoming Users

Sorry, Is it okay to welcome them if they have made good contributions?Jamie Shaw (talk) 08:26, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help.--Jamie Shaw (talk) 10:49, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Bridge scour

I'm not sure if I thanked your for nominating Bridge scour. Thank you!! It looks great, pic and all.--Anna Frodesiak (talk) 22:54, 10 January 2009 (UTC)

Spam pages

Very simple: the New Pages page.

I can't imagine those all being recent user accounts

You would be wrong. Start here and look things over.

The question you should be asking isn't, "How is he finding these?", but rather "Why aren't more people finding these?", or "Why are these being unfound for weeks?" --Calton | Talk 08:48, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

RJ: Australia Day

The summary comes from an article in the "bicentennial review" edition of the VHJ. I should be able to add the source in a week or so, when I get back to Melbourne. Ottre 04:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)

Long time no see

Hey \ /, it was good to see your name pop up on my watchlist. I haven't heard from you in a while...are you, like me, somewaht avoiding DYK for a little bit because of the fiascos that have happened there lately?

Anyway, I just wanted to let you know, I have been working on making a new template for nominating DYKs that will hopefully be simpler and clearer than the DYKsug/DYKsuggestion we have set up now (it's a bit of unfinished business I have left from before all the crap in December got me distracted); there's a version of it up and running and I've written more here. Since you know a lot about the current system and have been involved in the upkeep of the templates we're currently using, it would be nice to hear feedback from you on what you think of this new template, and how you think things should work (if you have time, of course).

Thanks, and I hope all is well, Politizer talk/contribs 00:58, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

Error in editing

Wanted to make a template about musical instruments but I edited the original template of continents by mistake. --Opus88888 (talk) 04:15, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

aGAIN

sORRY. i WILL NOT TOUCH IT ANYNMORe. Sorry, Im really sorry. Good night. --Opus88888 (talk) 04:32, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Next update

Can you try editing it again to see whether or not it is protected? I removed the cascading protection from DYLLock and then tried to remove the protection from Next update again but I'm not sure if it worked. Gatoclass (talk) 17:16, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Hello

Thank you for your opinion on Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Mixwell. I have decided that it's too early for it. I closed it by WP:Snow. Thanks! --Mixwell!Talk 03:23, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Re: Thanks

Whoops, I didn't even mean to revert you, I was aiming for the vandal! Oh well, it's fixed now. :) Cheers, –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 16:37, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for reverting vandalism to my user page. Best regards, Húsönd 18:21, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

Australia Day

Thank you. I hope you have a nice Australia Day. :) - Mark 00:32, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

Hi \/, regarding the flag burning thing in the Australia Day article; I'm not sure it warrants a mention. I feel that the sentence: "In 2008, an Invasion Day protester burnt the Australian Flag, prompting calls for flag burning to be illegal." has nothing to do with Australia Day, or Invasion/Survival Day. I feel that it should be expanded upon to give context to the action, or removed. The burning of the flag is not uncommon, and the wording of that sentence appears to cast disrepute on the protester, as linking the action to the political response seems to imply that it was illegal or immoral. hope to hear from you soon, --rakkar (talk) 09:45, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
Hmm.. I see your point about the possible disrepute insinuated against the protester. However, since the burning in this context is probably the best example of Australia Day animosity, it does deserve a mention. However, there isn't enough other materials around the entry to make it seem in place. I'll remove until there is enough other material to balance out its addition. » \ / (⁂) 09:56, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK nomination template

Hey \ /, thanks for your feedback. The template ({{NewDYKnom}}) now has a |rollover= parameter, to specify the alt-text for an image. Right now, if the person calls the template with an image but without writing alt-text, the alt-text defaults to <!--Insert rollover text here.--> (sort of like how Next has <!--ROLLOVER TEXT GOES HERE.-->). It would also be possible for me to make the alt-text default to the article title (ie, if you nominate Example with an image File:Stuff.png and don't specify alt-text, the alt-text would be "Example"), but I'm not sure if that would be useful—since some noms have multiple articles, or sometimes the picture and the article aren't the same (such as when the article is a country and the picture is a picture of the flag)...any thoughts? Politizer talk/contribs 00:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I think discretion would be better rather than filling in the rollover with the article name. Many hooks are made that picture the non-image, and a nasty <!---ROLLOVER --> is more likely to get noticed. For example:
We don't want a caption of 'space elevator' on a possible BLP? It could get much more unfortunate. » \ / (⁂) 01:40, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
I agree. Thanks for the input! Politizer talk/contribs 01:28, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

WP:ACC reservation

Hi! I noticed that you have reserved a closed request[3]. I'm not sure if this is intentional or not, but if this was unintentional, you might want to unreserve this request.

Thanks, Stwalkerster [ talk ] 21:53, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

Fixed, thanks » \ / (⁂) 05:17, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

New Messages

Hello, Backslash Forwardslash. You have new messages at K50 Dude's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Archive 1Archive 2Archive 3Archive 4Archive 5
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Backslash_Forwardslash/Archive_2&oldid=1090407088"