User talk:Cirt/Archive 1

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

→

Archive 5

Welcome

Welcome!

Hello, Cirt, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:

• The five pillars of Wikipedia
• Tutorial
• How to edit a page
• How to write a great article
• Manual of Style

I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question and then place {{helpme}} before the question on your talk page. Again, welcome! Stormtracker94 12:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Cirt 22:11, 22 September 2007 (UTC).

Cult suicide

You recently placed a template on the article Tiananmen Square self-immolation incident, and may be interested in partaking in the discussion taking place here. Ohconfucius 06:25, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt 10:28, 15 October 2007 (UTC).

Branch Davidian Category

I took myself out with looking, but after I looked and saw that you have NON-Davidians in there, still think it will be misunderstood as a listing of members. Could you change it to "Branch Davidian-Related"? Carol Moore 19:09, 17 October 2007 (UTC)User:Carolmooredc User talk:Carolmooredc

• Maybe it would be better to add a "researchers" subsection, instead. Cirt 04:07, 18 October 2007 (UTC).

Nominated for DYK

Hi. I've nominated South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today, an article you worked on, for consideration to appear on the Main Page as part of Wikipedia:Did you know. You can see the hook for the article at Template talk:Did you know#Articles created on October 16, where you can improve it if you see fit. Pontiff Greg Bard 22:48, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, my apologies but I had already self-nominated it, from a suggestion by user:BigHaz at Wikipedia talk:Did you know. Cirt 22:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC).

Great minds think alike.Pontiff Greg Bard 22:53, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Indeed. Glad to encounter you though, cheers ! Cirt 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC).

Nice work on this article. The expansion should mean it's perfectly qualified for DYK. If you ever have any other questions do feel free to ask. DYK is one of the friendliest projects on Wikipedia. Also, certainly feel free to copy whatever you like from my user page design! --JayHenry 06:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! Cirt 06:16, 19 October 2007 (UTC).

C/E

If you know someone specifically that doesn't copy editing for FAC articles, and does a good job, I'd ask them personally. What I've seen from the League is that you can put in a request for a c/e and they won't get to it for weeks, sometimes longer.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 22:31, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I really don't know anyone specifically that does. You could try Erik. I know he generally does a good job finding c/e issues, even though that isn't his forte. If he doesn't fix them then he surely give you a list of the issues. But, he isn't on the League, and I know he's usually busy with school and catologing the newly created film articles. If you go to Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/Members, they have an active list. I'd probably contact the names that are at the bottom of the active list, as they are the most recent additions. It's a short article, so it shouldn't take that long. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bignole (talk • contribs) 04:12, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Always. I might add, in case you were not aware of it, that Tony1 has a guide to writing better prose, which could help the article. You can find it here: User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:19, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Cirt 04:22, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

Hope it helps.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 04:26, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I went in and cleaned up some myself. A couple of yours I had to revert, as the rule is if it is an incomplete sentence then the comma goes on the outside. Also, you added a bunch of colons to the beginning of quotes. You should add a comma if you are pausing. I'm sure it still needs more copy editing.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:18, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, well thank you for your help, I hope you can see at the very least I'm making a good faith effort to follow your suggestions. Thanks again. Cirt 05:27, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

Of course. The articles coming along. Hopefully more opinions will come along.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 05:45, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

I did, but the coding got scrambled in with the other strike, so it didn't show up. I fixed it.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 21:55, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, okay thank you! Cirt 21:58, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

FAC

Thanks for your note on my talk page regarding the trapped in the closet FAC and for your swift response addressing my concerns. I have changed my vote to support.--Opark 77 22:38, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• No, thank you for the helpful way you raised your concerns in the first place. After these changes, the article is much better for it. Cirt 22:40, 20 October 2007 (UTC).

DYK: South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today

On 21 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today, 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.

--PFHLai 03:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt 04:57, 22 October 2007 (UTC).

Hook

• ...that the book South Park and Philosophy: You Know, I Learned Something Today analyzes the animated television comedy series South Park using philosophical concepts?

Cirt 08:40, 22 October 2007 (UTC).

Comment on strategy for GA nominations

I also felt that Operation Clambake should now be nominated for Good Article status. However, one of the requirements for passing a GA candidate is that the page should be stable. Therefore waiting some time (say, two weeks) after massive alterations have been made (such as the case with the OC article) is what I figured would be prudent. A worst case scenario now is the candidacy being failed on this reason alone. Of course this is not an insurmountable problem, one just has to renominate it after a little while. Just figured I'd share this thought with you. I haven't read through the article after all the new additions. I nevertheless would like to express my admiration for the major effort you have presented! __meco 07:54, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. However before my changes no one seemed to pay much heed to the article for a long while anyways. Hopefully it will pass as a GA. I did my part and reviewed another GA candidate too. Cirt 17:44, 23 October 2007 (UTC).

Working Man's Barnstar

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		Awarded for your great contributions and continuous efforts to improve the Trapped in the Closet (South Park) article to a featured article. Keep up the good work.--Swellman 22:12, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! This means a lot. Cirt 22:13, 23 October 2007 (UTC).

No problem. :)--Swellman 22:14, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

GAN

Sorry for the delay, I've had a hectic few days. I'd recommend nominating it again, and letting another editor look it over. They should see the prior review and recognize that you improved it. However, with the current backlog, it could take about a month for an article to be reviewed, so if you want that sped up, consider reviewing articles in front of yours. If you do so, look off of other reviews for help and look over the requirements of the GA criteria. It shouldn't have a problem of passing. --Nehrams2020 01:12, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. I am trying to help the backlog by reviewing at least 2 GANs for every new GAN I submit for consideration. Thanks again, Cirt 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC).

Hey.

I was actually thinking about making the Joy of Sect to be the first episode I work on. I'll try to help as much as I can, starting tomorrow. ✗iℎi✗(talk) 01:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Sweet. Scorpion was saying that there was a book on Simpsons and Religion... This will be fun. Cirt 01:29, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I'm currently setting up a status page here. Let's hope this one goes better than the season 1 drive... -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:33, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Okay, I'm doing a specific list anyways at Talk:The Simpsons (season 9), but it's lookin like NONE are already GA or FA. ugh. Cirt 01:35, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
      • Nope, we have 1 GA and an FL. That's better than we had when we started season 8, and there were only 2 of us then. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:39, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
• Ah. Cirt 01:41, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
• Ok, good idea Cirt. I have the Forever! book and the season nine DVD, so I can help there. I can do the plots well, but I have trouble with production. I'm not that great of a listener to audio commentaries, sadly. I mean, I hear the info, but can't tell who it is (yes, I know they say they're names at the beginning, but it's hard for me to stay consistent). ✗iℎi✗(talk) 01:46, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Trapped in the Closet (South Park)

You did a really good job with the page, congratulations. I've also done a lot of work on episode pages (including 2 FAs) and I know how hard it can be, especially with the fans always tainting pages with "vital" information. I was going to give you a barnstar, but you've already received one. I don't suppose your also are a Simpsons fan, because we could use good editors at The Simpsons WikiProject... -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:55, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! What Simpsons articles are you working on, in particular? I want to get the article The Joy of Sect up to FA. If you want to work on that one with me, that would be tremendous! Cirt 00:56, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I'm not working on any right now and I was partially joking, but if you are interested, you can find a list of Simpsons episodes that are potential targets for working on here. I'm a little burnt out on episodes (myself and another user got an entire seasons worth of episode articles to GA status in 2 months), but I would be more than willing to lend you a hand on any Simpsons or South Park episodes you would like to colaborate on. Having the Simpsons DVDs is pretty handy, but if you don't have them and need some commentary, just ask me and I'll give them a listen. I don't own any South Park DVDs (but have seen every episode), so it would be a tad harder for me to help there. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:01, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Well, the only two episodes of those series that come to mind right now are Super Best Friends, and The Return of Chef from South Park, and The Joy of Sect, from Simpsons. Let me know if you are interested. In the meantime, I have 2 more (not television related) potential GAs I want to work on, and 2 more potential FAs. Thanks again, and be in touch if you want to do the above episodes, we'd have to start finding secondary sources... Cirt 01:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
      • I'm ready and willing to work on Joy of Sect when you are. I'll also help out when you're ready to start work on Super Best Friends or Return of Chef. Do you have the Simpsons season 9 DVD? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
        • I do not have the Simpsons season 9 DVD. Cirt 01:08, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
          • Oh well, you can man things on the internet source front, and I can give the DVD commentary a listen. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
• Are you an Admin? How did you promote Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The Simpsons (season 9) to a Featured List? Cirt 01:10, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I'm not an admin. Anyone can close FLCs, and I've been doing it for a couple of months. However, FACs are all closed by user:Raul654. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:13, 24 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh, wow. In that case, there are probably a few editors from this discussion Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/The Simpsons (season 9), who might be willing to help make The Joy of Sect FA, like Xihix (talk · contribs)... Cirt 01:15, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
      • Xihix has vowed to get every episode in season 9 to FA status, so he probably would be more than willing to help. One thing you will quickly discover is that finding reliable sources for decade old episodes is difficult. For Joy of Sect, one would need to turn to the DVD commentaries and books for info. There was one book written that is devoted entirely to The Simpsons and religion, so it would probably have some good stuff (I'll try and track it down). -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Whenever we cite a DVD commentary, we just use this template: <ref name="Reardon">{{cite video | people=Reardon, Jim|year=2002|title=The Simpsons season 2 DVD commentary for the episode "Itchy & Scratchy & Marge"| medium=DVD||publisher=20th Century Fox}}</ref> and just change everything where applicable. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 13:09, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, sweet. You don't have to put down the exact minute:seconds on the DVD where you heard what bit of commentary? Cirt 13:11, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
  • Nope. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 13:16, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Pageant and user page

Sure, go ahead and take stuff from my page, I took the original design from someone else in the first place and played with it. I'll also take a look at A Very Merry Unauthorized Children's Scientology Pageant for you. --PresN 18:58, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you, to both answers. Cirt 18:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC).
  • Not really sure what to tell you about the box, it looks perfectly alright to me- it's about one line below the "author" line of the quote. I have a widescreen monitor, though, that might be changing things. --PresN 04:49, 25 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Oh, okay, I'll take another look. Found a couple more sources to add to that CD section as well, later on. Cirt 04:51, 25 October 2007 (UTC).

Reply

Yeah sure, go ahead. I had assumed that you were going to do the nom anyway. You might as well nom the page for GAC right now, because it will be at least a week before we get a review, so we'll have plenty of time to improve the page. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:59, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Okay. Cirt 21:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC).

The One with the Prom Video

Thanks for your thorough review of this article and promotion to GA status! Brad 00:52, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, no, I don't. I used to be very active at WP:PR, endeavouring to review an article every Monday afternoon (such is the allocation of time). Then I'd review an extra article whenever I submitted there, but I lost interest in the process after getting no feedback on the ones I posted (except for the automated reviews). I'll probably review an article at GAN in the near future, but I'm spending a lot less time on WP now so it's a matter of finding the time and the right article to review. And I'd imagine that after the GA Sweeps are completed, some articles might be demoted and the nominations process tightened up. Brad 01:03, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Heh. I'm stepping back from TV articles now and am definitely not planning to submit any more articles I've substantially contributed for GA; I got sucked into doing a dozen or so Friends episodes after cleaning up the pilot article, which took up a large chunk of my summer, and some articles (Lead Balloon in particular) just barely scrape the minimum standards set by the GA project, probably only getting through because it was better formatted compared to some other neglected articles. If there are any in my "TV-related" list that take your fancy, then by all means have a go at beefing it up! Brad 01:12, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Understood, sounds good. At any rate, good work, you've sure upped the quality on a bunch of articles. Cirt 01:19, 25 October 2007 (UTC).

DYK October 25

Did you know? was updated. On 25 October, 2007, a fact from the article George Roden, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Andrew c ^[talk] 01:22, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, but the article creator really deserves the credit, it's well sourced. Cirt 01:24, 25 October 2007 (UTC).

Strang Article

Thanks so much for your feedback on the Strang article and your invaluable assistance in getting it to "Good Article" status! After reading your comments and those of a different reviewer who felt it still needed improvement (especially in the opening and the "ibid" areas), I made some changes to:

• (1) Make the opening three paragraphs instead of just one;
• (2) Incorporate new and interesting material left by an anonymous editor into appropriate sections of the article, with editing to remove redundancies; and
• (3) Change all "ibids" into actual names of references.

If you have a moment sometime, could you look it over again, and tell me if you think it has been improved from when you reviewed it? I'd appreciate any feedback you could give before I send it up for Peer Review, as you suggested.

Thanks so much again for your help and comments heretofore. Cheers! - Ecjmartin 02:01, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Will do. Alternatively, you could just put it up for Peer Review, and I could make my comments there. Cirt 02:02, 25 October 2007 (UTC).

WikiProject Good articles

FYI, the participants list has now been changed back to a more portable format. Thank you for your input and your interest in the project! All the best, EyeSerene^TALK 08:10, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you, I just joined up, 150th member! Cirt 15:50, 25 October 2007 (UTC).

Semi automated peer review

I think the idea of putting semi-automated peer reviews on their own page is two-fold: 1) it keeps the WP:PR page smaller (the WP:PR/A page is over 200K this month) and 2) some reviewers don't like the semi-automated reviews and so this keeps them separate. I will take a look at your article and try to give some real human comments in the next few days. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:28, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the explanation. And truly, thanks for the automated comments, they are really helpful. I already implemented an easy one, reorganizing the sections per WP:LAYOUT, and I will work on the other stuff later. Cirt 03:31, 26 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I do like them for their help with important but nitpicky things. Glad to be of help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:20, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Unauthorized Pageant thoughts

I read it quickly and think that it has a few things that need to be fixed before going to FAC. I have a few other things on my plate now and need to read it more carefully. General impressions - how long is the play? How many acts? How long were its runs at each theater (menitoned for some, not all)? Also the Obie award is mentioned four times, which is probably two too many (lead and once in awards). My other advice is to read and participate in some current FAC discussions (if you are not already) to see what the hot button issues are currently. More in a day or few, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:36, 27 October 2007 (UTC) PS Thanks for weighing in at WP:FLC, I appreciate your kind words very much Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:37, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• No problem, it is a great list. Thanks for these additional thoughts, I will try to find sources that discuss how long the runs were at each theater, etc. And I will check out how many times the Obie Award is mentioned. These are good pointers, I think the article is looking a lot better now actually. Cirt 04:38, 27 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I'm going to keep track of these further suggestions at the Peer Review. Cirt 04:52, 27 October 2007 (UTC).

Trapped in the Closet

I've requested the article for November 16. You can read more here. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

I have a feeling that it might not make the main page yet. It was just promoted, and there have been a lot of requests for pop culture related pages as of late. Either way, it's worth a try. I'm also going to be requesting The Simpsons for December 17 (airdate of the first episode), but I won't be able to do that for a few weeks. Anyway, do you have any ideas about what page you want to work on now? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:08, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

You mean other articles? Ha, ha, I have my hands full with the stuff I am doing at the moment. I could give you a laundry list if you like, but getting The Joy of Sect to WP:FA is enough at the moment to start with, hehe. Cirt 01:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC).

Your help on any of the other season 9 episodes would be most appreciated. You seem to enjoy working on episodes with religious themes, what about Lisa the Skeptic? -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:15, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, that is also in The Simpsons (Season 9)... I suppose if I helped out with more than just one episode in Season 9, I could be considered as actually contributing to your topic drive in a meaningful way, and not just one episode. Cirt 01:16, 28 October 2007 (UTC).

• On second thought, The Trouble with Trillions also looks promising, dealing with a theme that is related to The Joy of Sect, that being tax fraud. Want to help me out with getting those two to WP:GAC status? I'm not promising I'll work on them past GA though, FA on two more would be a bit much. Cirt 01:26, 28 October 2007 (UTC).
  • Like I said before, we only need 2 or 3 FAs, so getting most of them to GA status is more than enough. I'll help out where I can. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 01:28, 28 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Thanks! See Wikipedia:WikiProject The Simpsons/Featured topic Drive. It does help that someone already did the Plot section pretty well on both of them, whether it's sourced or not. Cirt 01:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC).

The Living Daylights: GA On Hold

Please keep in mind that any information obtained directly from the film such as plot need not be sourced. And the table also is not compulsory for the cast list, bullets are fine if you have descriptions about the characters. Vikrant Phadkay 16:19, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for bringing this up. I actually am not 100% certain on plots needing to be sourced in film articles, I know they should be in Television articles. I asked for another opinion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Films, and hopefully they will stop by Talk:The Living Daylights and provide one. Cirt 16:30, 28 October 2007 (UTC).

This Is Not The Life I Ordered

On 28 October, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article This Is Not The Life I Ordered, 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.

--GeeJo ^(t)⁄_(c) • 18:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt 18:57, 28 October 2007 (UTC).

Successful RfA - Thank you!

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. It was successful, and I was promoted to Administrator today. I appreciate your comments and will take them to heart as I learn the ropes. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 23:10, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• My pleasure, and good luck! Cirt 00:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

Thanks!

Thanks very much for supporting my RfA. Unfortunately it wasn't a success, however, I appreciate your support all the same! —— Ryan (^talk/_contribs) 23:35, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• No worries. Do keep me posted though, and I hope you try again at some point in the future. Cirt 00:05, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

Just so you know

Trapped in the Closet had a weak chance of making the main page because it was recently promoted, and an episode article was featured a month ago, but now that there is a plausible alternative (Oklahoma), that is the nail in the coffin. So, I withdrew the request so that Oklahoma could be put there instead. Sorry, but it really didn't have a lot of a chance anyway. There are alternatives though, and it WILL make the main page some day. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:50, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, no problems, there are some other good potential dates as I posted suggestions on the talk page. Cirt 00:55, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

Triple crown

I, Durova award Cirt the triple crown for outstanding content contributions to Wikipedia. Thank you for all you do. Durova^Charge! 04:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Your Majesty, it is with joy that I award you these crowns for outstanding improvements to Wikipedia's coverage of South Park. ;) Durova^Charge! 04:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! This honor spurs me on to Imperial triple crown jewels. Cirt 04:32, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

GA

Hey can you help out with the promotion of Unnale Unnale to a GA? Cheers Universal Hero 12:17, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• What do you mean, like review it for you? Cirt 12:18, 29 October 2007 (UTC).
  • I will review it. I sort of have a policy of giving one or two back and reviewing articles within topics I post my own GA noms to anyway, so I would have probably reviewed this one sooner or later. Going to read it now... Cirt 15:29, 29 October 2007 (UTC).
• Done. GA on Hold. Message left on Unnale Unnale talk page, message me on my talk when point are addressed. Cirt 15:59, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

Image

You're welcome to use the imaghe however you'd like. I keep meaning to take the images I've uploaded to WP and upload them to the Commons as well. Your suggestion is another reminder. I'll take a look at the CAN article. Cheers, •:• Will Beback •:• 17:57, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt 17:58, 29 October 2007 (UTC).

Media refs

After spending far too much time searching the net over and over again for references for articles, I decided to get myself organized, and dumped my database of articles into a TiddlyWiki as an experiment. My work in progress is FrontCite (requires Javascript, ~1MB)

• The topic tagging has barely started and is uneven. (I think CAN was one of the ones that I've started on.)
• There's a cite template for news articles that can be copy/pasted. (Double-check and add wikilinks where needed.)
• Almost all the links are to the original source or an official archive. Most of the few that are not are tagged with Secondary copy.
• It's a self-contained file, and can be saved locally and edited, feel free!

Anyway, you seemed to enjoy the CAN links, so I thought I'd give you the complete set, as it were. :) AndroidCat 07:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, I will check it out and if there are WP:RS sources then I will try to incorporate them on some related articles to improve their quality on the project. Cirt 07:15, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

Portal:Scientology

The only real downside to your proposal is that for a portal to even have a chance at Featured Portal status it needs at least 5 or 6 different selections for each of the main sections. Right now, the Scientology project has only three biographies which would qualify for inclusion on the portal if we used the criteria you selected, maybe four if you count Xenu. Personally, I would love to limit the selection to the current or former FAs and GAs. We just don't have enough content at that level to do so right now, at least on the biography side. And having "staggered" rotations of differing sections is something I don't think I've ever seen, and it might prevent FP status as well. I acknowledge that we aren't likely to get FP status anytime soon, because a portal has to be running for several months before it's even considered. But the potential at least is there. If and when we get sufficient content to use past or current FAs or GAs, though, I'm certainly going to try to limit the portal to such articles. John Carter 14:37, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Replied on your talk. Cirt 14:40, 30 October 2007 (UTC).
• Featured portal criteria can be found at WP:WIAFPo. It would be possible to limit the number of articles more than we have, though. I've never seen any evidence that articles have to be at GA level or better for inclusion, just that they be relevant to the subject of the portal. Regarding the new portal icon tag, I think it looks real good, and given the scope of the project there's no real likelihood of any objections down the road to having it placed on all the relevant articles. Right now, the biggest question to me is whether you think we should continue to have the "suggestions" links at the bottom of each section or not. We can probably ultimately stand to have the length of each section standardized as well, for optimum optical appeal, but that's probably not the biggest priority out there. John Carter 15:36, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
• Looks very good. Better than what I did, certainly. Exactly how to proceed from here is a bit of a question. I know there is Wikipedia:Portal peer review, and that would probably be the best place to go for any further suggestions. John Carter 01:00, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Rainbow/PUSH

Thanks for the encouragement and keep up the good work yourself. We hope to see more trifectas.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 15:46, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Smile

NHRHS2010 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.

NHRHS2010 talk 22:52, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

I found you after you voted neutral on User:Lradrama's RfA, per my neutral vote. Also, I made my 10,000th edit last Sunday, in accordance to My Preferences (including deleted edits). NHRHS2010 talk 22:56, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

• Wow, congratulations. I'll get there at some point... Cirt 22:58, 30 October 2007 (UTC).

My (KWSN's) RFA

Thank you for commenting my recent (and successful!) RfA. It passed at at 55/17/6. I'll try to make some changes based on your comments. Kwsn (Ni!) 01:44, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations, I hope you use the mop well. Cirt 02:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

The Chaser's War on Everything

I've replied to some of your comments, and I think most have been addressed. Could you take another look please? — H₂O —  09:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Will do. Cirt 09:48, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

Cheers. By the way, I fixed up the formatting :) — H₂O —  10:01, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. Feel free to review a couple at WP:GAC, mine are sorta pending at the moment. I'm not saying review one of my GACs, just that they always seem to be backlogged over there. That's why I pitch in and review when I post my own noms. Cirt 10:02, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

Scientology portal

Yeah, we should probably add as many articles as we can to the portal. However, we'd have to include matching bios, pictures, and whatever else as well, to ensure that the portal doesn't look strange with only a few sections filled when someone looks to show new sections. John Carter 14:46, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Superman film series

Thanky You! I've worked so hard to get this article to a good status and now it finally is. Thank you! Also, I think that this article is good enough for FA status, and I've nominated it. Do you think it should be a featured article?Limetolime 20:40, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• I will take a look. Cirt 23:42, 31 October 2007 (UTC).

Adminship

Thank you for the kind offer. I'm actually more than a little shocked to see three show up in such rapid succession. One of the things I've noticed they look for in admins is at least one FA. Right now, I haven't done anything quite that good. Actually, I don't think I even have a GA yet. And, unfortunately, I've noticed when I've supported others in the past that one has to commit to performing certain "admin" activities. Right now, I think that I've committed myself to trying to do a bit too much, like handling assessments for various projects, to actually be able to fulfill any such functions. If and when I finish with that, maybe, hopefully, by the end of the year, then maybe I'll reconsider it.

You, however, are a different matter. Right now, I don't think a lot of people would say you've been with the project long enough to qualify. Your contributions to date, however, are really nothing less than amazing. In a few months, I can easily imagine you getting approved with few if any objections. John Carter 00:44, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you, however individuals with a focus on the subject matter of articles I tend to work on seem to have, shall we say, tenacious followers at times, and not always in a supportive manner. This is not something that I am interested in, either, because I, like you, would rather focus on improving the quality of articles. Cirt 00:48, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter for November 2007

The November 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 December 2007 issue. Dr. Cash 01:09, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know. Cirt 01:10, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

Pageant

Cirt, I still haven't had a chance to read the whole article. Just read the reception section.-BillDeanCarter 07:04, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, no worries. Cirt 07:05, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

Reply

Thanks for your email - I've uploadeda screen shot of one of the old index pages to Commons under public domain as Image:ScienTOMogy.jpg so you obviously may use as you wish - If this isn't the shot you prefer then let me know and I'll provide another. Thanks again Glen 22:49, 1 November 2007 (UTC) PS: This just reminds me I've been meaning to update that darn website and get it back online in forever... should really get onto that! :)

• Thanks, this will enrich the article. Cirt 22:50, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

My Rfa

Thanks for voting in my Rfa, which I withdrew from yesterday. Though I did not get promoted, I see this Rfa as being a success nonetheless. What I got out of this Rfa will help me to be a better, all around editor. Because of this Rfa I have decided to become better in other areas of editing. I'm not going to just be a vandalfighter. Though vandalfighting is good, being active in all areas of editing is even better. Have a nice day.--SJP 22:54, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Good luck to you, we value your work here on the project. Cirt 22:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC).

Thank you!

for reviewing Seal of Dartmouth College! GA reviewing is no easy task, and I appreciate your help & the kind words. Dylan 23:29, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I know! You've inspired me, I'm looking over ScienTOMogy as we speak (I've never reviewed for GA before, but you're right, if that backlog is ever to clear, we need we need to all pitch in). Dylan 23:34, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

I've put ScienTOMogy on hold -- see the talk page. Dylan 00:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for addressing the concerns I raised; I've promoted ScienTOMogy to GA status. Nice job! Dylan 05:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! Cirt 05:49, 2 November 2007 (UTC).

Belated response

... to your post here. I'm sorry you ignored my advice, I think you missed an opportunity there. But that's your prerogative. Bishonen | talk 07:24, 2 November 2007 (UTC).

• I am in communication with Durova (talk · contribs) about this, I will respond to you via email. Cirt 07:26, 2 November 2007 (UTC).

AfD

Just to let you know, I have nominated ScienTOMogy for deletion. Steve Dufour 13:32, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Click "show" to see my message. What is meant to be and what is not... Thank you for your recent comments and vote at my Request for Adminship. It was not successful. I don't believe this is unfortunate as it leaves me with much to ponder and a fresh slate from which I can better myself as an editor in order to be more compliant with the policies that are expected by Wikipedia. If you feel that there is anything that was not covered by the RfA that I need improvement in, I would implore your input and feedback as I hope and intend to improve as best I'm guided. All the best in your own endeavours in the real world, and also when you're not on Wikipedia. lincalinca 14:35, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Good luck to you too Lincalinca (talk · contribs), we value your contributions here on the project. Cirt 22:15, 2 November 2007 (UTC).

My recent RfA

Thank you for participating in my recent RfA. Although the voting ended at 36/22/5, there was no consensus to promote, and the RfA was unsuccessful. I would like the thank you nonetheless for supporting me during the RfA, and hope that any future RfA’s proceed better than this one did. Again, I thank you for your support. ≈ The Haunted Angel Review Me! 02:20, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• You are most welcome. We still value your presence here on the project, keep your hopes up in the future. Cirt 02:21, 3 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for your support

Thanks for your support with respect to my request for adminship, which successfully closed today with a count of 47 support, 1 oppose. If you ever see me doing anything that makes you less than pleased that you supported my request, I hope to hear about it from you. See you around Wikipedia! Accounting4Taste 05:24, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations! See you around Wikipedia! Cirt 05:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC).

Early Greg Skrepenak DYK

Is there a reason why you posted Greg Skrepenak so early. I had specifically mentioned a later time as optimal.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 17:12, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• My apologies, I did not see that, I did not immediately see a suitable DYK from an earlier date. Cirt 18:49, 3 November 2007 (UTC).

Joy of Sect

I've gotten a few copyeditors to take a look at the page, and they think it's ready, so go for it. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

• Okay. Cirt 21:25, 3 November 2007 (UTC).

Hey. I did hear about the mass suicide cult, the Heavens Gate cult, that was mentioned in the commentary. This is what Steve O'Donnell said:

Steve: Whats odd, a strange coincidence, you told me^ to describe the idea over the phone, I did a first draft, and uh mailed it to you. I was living in New York and between the time I sent you the script and flew into California all in about weeks time, there was the heavens gate cult where these thirty nine people killed themselves, and there were weird parellels, they believed a spaceship was coming and they wore matching clothes, and the odd sneakers, and so on. So, there was some people who thought I was a psychic. But we did change some of the story to not be like the heavens gate cult, as it seemed it would be in bad taste.

^ - Xihix note: can't distinguish who, though doesn't seem to be important. I can find out if you want me to. ✗iℎi✗(talk) 21:57, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Wait! It may have not been Steve. I only assumed it was him as he wrote it, but it seems that David came up with the plot? I dunno, let me re-listen to it. ✗iℎi✗(talk) 22:00, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, it indeed was David that was talking. Sorry for the misinformation, I really thought it would be Steve since it says he wrote it. Sorry :P ✗iℎi✗(talk) 22:01, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

Okay, thanks, I will take a look at fitting this in. Cirt 00:30, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

 Done, thanks. Cirt 01:17, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks!

		My RFA
		Thanks for participating in my request for adminship, which ended with 56 supports, one oppose, and one neutral. I hope to accomplish beyond what is expected of me and work to help those that lent me their trust. east.718 at 02:27, 11/4/2007

• Congratulations, and good luck to you, I'm sure you'll do fine. Cirt 03:12, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

The Wiz

Holy cow, I just read this article yesterday. I didn't really think about its status, but it is great. Thanks for the RfA well-wishing, and congrats on this article- not to mention your other excellent articles. -- Mike (Kicking222) 04:01, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! Cirt 04:02, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

Re: Noah Lottick

• Though I did not express a "merge" opinion but rather "Strong Keep", I approve of the way you merged the material, and do not object to your assessment of the AFD consensus. Thank you. Cirt 06:27, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

Cheers, it's nice to receive feedback on these things. --bainer (talk) 07:50, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. Cirt 12:45, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

Wikipedia has a new administrator!

Thanks! Thank you for voicing your opinion in my RfA, which passed with 54 supports, 2 opposes and 3 neutrals. Thanks for your support, I really appreciate it. I hope to exceed expectations, If you have any advice please feel free to let me know. Thanks again!. --¤ The-G-Unit-฿oss ¤

• Congratulations, and good luck to you in your new role! Cirt 21:41, 4 November 2007 (UTC).

Reply

Scorpion_McClure@hotmail.com is the one I use for Wikipedia stuff, but I rarely check it so you will have to leave a message on my talk page before e-mailing me. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 22:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Replied. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 23:11, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

GlassCobra's RfA

		My RFA
		Hey Cirt! Thanks for your support in my request for adminship, which ended with 61 supports, 3 opposes, and 1 neutral. I hope your confidence in me proves to be justified, and please feel free to call on me if you ever need any help or opinions! GlassCobra 01:43, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations, I am sure you will do fine, and I will remember to call on you if I need assistance or your opinion in a matter. Cirt 01:50, 5 November 2007 (UTC).

DYK

On November 5, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mork Goes Erk, 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.

Hello again! Well done! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:54, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cirt 02:59, 5 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks

Thank you for voicing your opinions in my recent RFA which unfortunately did not pass at (47/23/5). I will be sure to take the advice the community has given me and wait till someone nominates me next time as well as improve my editing skills. Have a great day(or night)! --Hdt83 ^Chat 05:55, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• We still value your work on the project. Good luck to you in the future! Cirt 05:56, 5 November 2007 (UTC).

Henrik's RfA thanks!

Thanks for supporting my RfA, it closed today with a final tally of 39 supports, 1 oppose and 1 neutral. As always, if you ever see me doing anything which would cause you to regret giving me your support, let me know. henrik•talk 18:57, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations! I'm sure you'll do fine. Cirt 20:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC).

Thank you bunches!

Thank you so much for suppporting my RfA. I was promoted with a total of (44/1/0) - a vote of confidence from the community that I find humbling and motivating. I will not abuse your trust. Look forward to working with you! (Esprit15d 21:31, 5 November 2007 (UTC))

• Congratulations! Looking forward to working with you too! Cirt 23:30, 5 November 2007 (UTC).

Thank you for your support.

Remember, remember, the fifth of November? Thank you to everyone who participated in my Request for adminship, which was successful at 50/5/0 on November 5th, 2007. It became, as you may know, rather contentious toward the end (though fortunately no gunpowder was involved), and I appreciate the work of other Wikipedians to keep it focused. --Thespian 02:17, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Congrats, and good luck! Cirt 04:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC).

Sterling Management Systems

I just undid a bunch of horribly POV edits that have accumulated to make the article a POV fluff piece. Take a look.--Fahrenheit451 02:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, I am not involved with that article anymore. Good luck to you in your efforts there to have it not be a POV fluff piece, I empathize with you, but do not wish to help you with this one, too much effort at this point in time. Later, Cirt 04:10, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Blind Ambition (Family Guy)

Thanks for your review of the above article. I have fixed everything as you said, however would it be OK to leave the references, they are currently set out in a format that would be similar (if not exactly the same), so can we leave them as they are formatted correctly? If not, please leave a message. Qst 13:08, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• I'll get back to you soon. Cirt 15:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC).

Cirt, may I ask that you reconsider your request for an expansion of the lead? If you look at good articles such as Burns, Baby Burns, Grade School confidential etc, they all have brief introductions, this is because that the whole information from the article should not be summed up in to the introduction, I am not requesting that you pull any strings for this article, just that you reconsider that bit - as many good articles only have a short lead (some shorter than this article). Qst 17:06, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

No, not at all, thanks for asking the question. I'll respond at the article's talk page. Cirt 17:07, 6 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for passing it, it's the first Family Guy good article (only 1, 2 - 100 or so left) :). I was just about to add the citations using the {{cite web}} template, but it says on WP:CIT that you do not have to use them. Thanks again, Cirt — I hope I can see you reviewing some more Family Guy articles, as I'm working on getting all of the Season 5 episodes up to GA status, starting with Mother Tucker. Best wishes, Qst 17:19, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for the award :) ✗iℎi✗(talk) 21:22, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• Well, you have greatly improved the quality of over five articles, as specified in the award's description. Cirt 22:29, 6 November 2007 (UTC).

Space Pilot 3000

I think I have addressed your GA concerns for the article and I have responded here (the diff I link to in that case is not the most recent but it is a good summary). I think most of the issues have been addressed, feel free to point them out if I'm wrong though. Stardust8212 04:03, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• I will take a look in a moment, in the middle of writing a new article - always fun stuff :) Cirt 04:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
  • No rush. Stardust8212 04:13, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

OhanaUnited's RfA

Thanks for voting at my RfA. Unfortunately, the result stands at 51 support, 21 oppose and 7 neutral which means that I did not succeed. As many expressed their appreciation of my works in featured portals during my RfA, I will fill up the vacuum position of director in featured portal candidates to maintain the standards of featured contents in addition to my active role in Good articles. Have a great day. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 03:51, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry about that, but you're right, WP:FPOC and WP:GAC are two areas where we definitely need some help on the project. Cirt 04:52, 8 November 2007 (UTC).

GA count

I see you have 11 GACs. Is the GA count on your user page current?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 02:22, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, it is. To my knowledge I have reviewed about 20 or so GACs, but I was not keeping an exact count on that. Why do you ask? Cirt 02:26, 9 November 2007 (UTC).
  • I think it is unusual for someone to have so many GACs and only a handful of GA claims, so I was asking. Keep up the good work creating and reviewing. I have only reviewed 2 and have 40 GAs (38 current + 2 promoted to FA) and 7 current GACs. I should spend more time reviewing.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 02:31, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
    • Why thank you, and great work to you too! I suppose they're just backlogged at the moment. I tend to do a GA review for at least every one article I nominate, that way I'm not bogging them down over there. Cirt 02:33, 9 November 2007 (UTC).
      • I show them in my header with their class. If they have been promoted they are removed from GA-class. I would review more if I was getting more help at WP:CHICOTW. I will keep that running and cranking out WP:GACs as best I can.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/tcfkaWCDbwincowtchatlotpsoplrttaDCLaM) 02:49, 9 November 2007 (UTC)
        • Sounds good. Again, great work, most impressive stuff! If I find some more Chicago-themed things I'm interested in, I will be sure to let you know. Cirt 02:51, 9 November 2007 (UTC).

GA Review of Hell Is Other Robots

Hi, I seem to have you down as the nominee for this article. I have failed it reluctantly. There are some issues that I think need addressing, but I think they need a bit more time than the rush an "On Hold" implies. There are some factual and readability issues, and I've left details on the talk page of the article. Any questions, please drop them down on my talk page, or I might not notice them! --Fritzpoll 18:00, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• No worries, I'll try to address some of your concerns when I get a chance, and wait a bit to re-nom it. Cirt 20:29, 9 November 2007 (UTC).

Lions for Lambs

I noticed that you've done considerable expansion to Lions for Lambs. I was wondering if you've noticed the talk page, which has headlines that could be implemented, especially for a true Production section. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 16:10, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure; it's always good to see solid expansion of a recent film article. Take a look at the talk page for WikiProject Films -- I've listed other films whose articles' talk pages have even more headline, such as Into the Wild (film). I look forward to seeing what you can do! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:56, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Oh, trust me, I know the feeling... so much work, so little time. By the way, can I suggest just removing the "Structure" section completely? If the structure is worth commenting upon, it would show in the headlines and the reviews and not through an editor's original perspective. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:00, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

That looks great! It looks very useful. I was wondering, do you think that such an article should be about interpretations for both the book and the film? Most of the academic studies I've accumulated have been film-related. I've come across maybe one or two studies of the book, but I didn't include it because of what I intended for the article. Thoughts on that? A lot of the studies are very detailed readings, which is why the article has been long on hold. —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:24, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I may follow through the other way around. Since I'm editing film articles, and Fight Club is a Good Article that covers the debate in some fashion, I think the current benefit would be to cover studies of the film. I can bring up the matter on the talk page to inquire others about a shifting to a more general topic. There are some distinctions between the book and the film, though -- not all the studies about the film are related to the subject matter of the book, but more about Fincher's specific portrayal. I really wish I could take a big chunk of time out of my life to just flesh out that article fully. Hopefully I'll be able to do so in the near future. Again, I appreciate the passage you provided! I'm going to be getting off Wikipedia for the day... been doing too much wiki-loafing, and I need to worry about plans for the evening. Later! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:31, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

I can see the DYK already: "...that one of the interpretations of the film Fight Club is a modern example of films in the punk subculture? (something like that) I'll be sure to contact you when/if I get started; it'd be great to have another pair of eyes on such a work! Cheers! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:35, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Worth Bingham

Sorry I didn't get back to you sooner — high school football playoff time here in Alabama, which means I'm busy. Sadly, there's not a lot of source material about Worth Bingham, mainly due to his untimely death and relative obscurity (relative, that is, to the rest of the Binghams). There is likely some print material available about him back in Louisville in a library or two, particularly the Filson Club, but unfortunately I'm 350 miles away right now. I'll see what I can dig up online, but I've looked before and come up largely empty. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 08:20, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Looks good. I'm barely old enough to remember Worth Bingham's death. I remember the public family fight and subsequent sale of the Bingham media properties much more clearly. The Courier-Journal was the paper that every up-and-coming newspaper reporter or photographer in the Commonwealth aspired to work for in those days; it still is today, but much less so. One of our reporters at The Birmingham News was up for the Bingham Prize for an investigative series he did. He didn't get the Bingham, but did get the Pulitzer. - Realkyhick (Talk to me) 08:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Mork Goes Erk

I have reviewed the article, if you have any questions, feel free to ask me them on my talkpage. Regards FamicomJL 16:42, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cirt 21:27, 11 November 2007 (UTC).

The Plan

Does that tag indicate that you're currently going to work on a reception section? If so, it's fine to leave it for now. Otherwise, I'll just merge the section with real world information until you are able to add one. You can reply here. TTN 21:44, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• I already commented on your talk page, I'll keep the thread there. Cirt 21:45, 11 November 2007 (UTC).

It's possible some of them may be redirected in the future, but it won't be that many (if any). They already had thirty good articles and three or four featured articles when I last checked, and I'm sure they have more by now. That is enough to show that they have a good grasp of things. This episode on the other hand is rather lacking, and without a reception section, that small little paragraph cannot hold an article. TTN 21:51, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

As long as it will not stay in its current condition, that's fine. TTN 21:55, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless they actually assert improvement like you just did, their opinions hold little weight. The actual consensus is found within our policies and guidelines, so people have to argue from that standpoint to actually have a point. Listening to them as is would be just as effective as listening to ten fans rant about why their favorite shows need eighty articles, when ten paragraphs suffice. TTN 21:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK userbox

What would you think about changing the image to Image:Symbol question.svg, like you have in your header? I thought it might go along more with the GA and FA userboxes. GlassCobra 21:59, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Good call. I've just posted there. Thanks! GlassCobra 22:07, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 12 November, 2007, a fact from the article Conscience-in-Media Award, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 21:03, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cirt 04:22, 13 November 2007 (UTC).

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 13 November, 2007, a fact from the article I'm Dysfunctional, You're Dysfunctional, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 15:44, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cirt 17:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC).

My RfA

Hi Cirt, thank you so much for voicing your support in my successful RfA. I'm humbled to have the community's trust. As I master the ways of the mop and bucket, please don't hesitate to message me for any advice or corrections. Cheers! Spellcast 23:17, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Good luck to you! Cirt 23:30, 13 November 2007 (UTC).

Thankspam

• Thanks for the thankspam, and good luck to you! Cirt 05:19, 14 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks

Thank you for your kind comments. ISD 10:03, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

He probably would, but I don't think it has been brought to his attention. ISD 10:09, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Maybe I will. ISD 10:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 15 November, 2007, a fact from the article Worth Bingham Prize, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 05:40, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Man, you are just racking up these DYKs! Keep it up! GlassCobra 05:51, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I just see a gap on the project with a missing article with lots of potential for good sourcing out there, and try to fill it best I can. Cirt 06:07, 15 November 2007 (UTC).

If you please

Hey Cirt, I know you're a good GA reviewer (As you've reviewed one of my other GA's), so would you please review Mother Tucker, Its been waiting for a while, and I will admit that I don't have much patience. Regards, Qst 16:55, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• I'll try to take a look when I get a chance. Cirt 21:15, 15 November 2007 (UTC).

Okay:

• Copyediting/grammar cleanup —  Done
• Expansion of introduction —  Done
• Provide more references for reception —  Not done, All of the information covered in that section can be found in the link - no other reception information is available. Qst 16:26, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Ralph Larkin, was selected for DYK!

On November 16, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ralph Larkin, 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.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 21:52, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you for the acknowledgment! -- Cirt (talk) 22:08, 16 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks!

	<font=3> Thanks for your support and comments - List of municipalities in Lycoming County, Pennsylvania made featured list! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:59, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• Congratulations! Cirt (talk) 02:26, 17 November 2007 (UTC).

DYK

Did you know? was updated. On 18 November, 2007, a fact from the article Gerald Loeb Award, which you recently nominated, was featured in that section on the Main Page. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Zzyzx11 (Talk) 00:54, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Cirt (talk) 00:58, 18 November 2007 (UTC).

Rajneeshpuram images

Hi, I noticed you were looking for images of Rajneeshpuram – you might find something usable at this site. It has a "use freely but state my copyright" policy, and I used one of its pictures in the Osho article. Cheers, -- Jayen466 22:52, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt (talk) 23:00, 18 November 2007 (UTC).

(In reply to your question on my talk page:)

Oh, I thought a few more might be suitable candidates – the Rolls-Royce is an iconic picture, but not really an illustration of Rajneeshpuram as such. I suppose the best picture might be number 32 (tent city for the festival, with the meditation hall); others worth considering might be 4, 13, 18, 28, 49. (The meditation hall was billed as the nation's "largest greenhouse" by followers, IIRC, described as such to circumvent building restrictions.) -- Jayen466 23:39, 18 November 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 19 November, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tom Cruise: An Unauthorized Biography, 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.

Cheers, Daniel 11:30, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• Cheers, thanks! Cirt (talk) 14:17, 19 November 2007 (UTC).

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, doomsday cult, was selected for DYK!

On November 20, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article doomsday cult, 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.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 22:24, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• My pleasure. Cirt (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

est and The Forum in popular culture

I've reviewed and placed on GA Hold. Minor issues which a half hour of copy editing would solve. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 00:22, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• I'll take a look, thank you for looking at it. Cirt (talk) 03:05, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

Other than the formatting problem and a general clean-up, the article seems good to me. Look over it in the next couple of days and - unless something weird is noted - I think it should pass. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 04:07, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

TNN

Do you have any ida how to stop this guy? Please contact me on my talk page if you'd like to coordinate something (anything). --HanzoHattori (talk) 04:23, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• Responded on user's talk page. Cirt (talk) 12:53, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

The Joy of Sect

Hey, don't worry about it! I actually thought your replies were pretty polite. I never felt offended or anything. Zagalejo^^^ 18:11, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your vote

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed with a vote of (53/0/1). As a token of my appreciation, please accept this bowl of tzatziki. I feel honored to be trusted by so many of you. Wikipedia is such a large community, that my acceptance in the face of such large numbers truly is humbling. I will use my new tools to continue the tasks for which you entrusted them to me. Gratefully, EncycloPetey (talk) 18:34, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• Hehe, thanks. Cirt (talk) 21:44, 21 November 2007 (UTC).

For your work on DYK and DYK/Next update

Thanks for your all-round comments and hard work on Template talk:Did you know and Template:Did you know/Next update! It took me just one update to realise we really need more people like you. Again, thank you.

I can't think of a good barnstar to give you, so you are free to frame this comment and put it anywhere you like. ;-) Awyong Jeffrey Mordecai Salleh 15:21, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you so much! This really means a lot, I appreciate you coming over here to thank me! Cirt (talk) 15:22, 22 November 2007 (UTC).

I was just reading 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack. That's really an excellent article, and I hope you take it to FA status someday! I was quite surprised that Osho of all people was behind the first US bioterror attack! Nishkid64 (talk) 04:48, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

On November 23, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack, 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.

Thanks for your updating and articel work.Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:24, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for saying so! Much appreciated. Now, what article to create next... Cirt (talk) 05:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC).

Re: Ticket to Heaven

Take a look here; the two subsections have commented-out articles, and the headlines at the beginning may have more information about the film. That's the best I can do in 5 minutes. :) —Erik (talk • contrib) - 21:46, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Barnstar!

		The Half Barnstar
		Awarded to you and to Jayen466. For the most civil disagreement I have ever seen on Wikipedia, at 1984 Rajneeshee bioterror attack. Very impressive. Keep it up! Katr67 (talk) 23:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you so much! So far, so good, yes. Cirt (talk) 23:17, 23 November 2007 (UTC).
  • Ah, so you got the other half. :-) See [1] Cheers, Jayen466 23:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC)
    • That's how the "half barnstar" works I guess. Cirt (talk) 23:25, 23 November 2007 (UTC).

Oregon Templates

I appreciate the efforts, but two things: Not to sound cranky, but no they don't look better in my opinion, everything is left aligned and I prefer the logo in the upper left. Second, WP:BOLD has a caveat about templates, you really should have consulted those at the project before making a significant formatting/appearance change. Next time please discuss first to save wasted effort. For now let's get the opinions of others through WP:ORE. Aboutmovies (talk) 17:27, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

• Replied on your talk page. But yeah, perhaps you are right, but it is easy to change it back. I'll wait before doing that to hear from the WP:ORE folks a bit more. Cirt (talk) 23:12, 24 November 2007 (UTC).

I'm pretty sure you are correct with the picture option, what you did is what I had tried a few months ago when I was converting the template to collapsable. I couldn't figure out a way to move the picture to the upper left. The option you used while simplier to implement, didn't leave the template in its original format, which is meant to parrallel the {{Oregon}} template. I'll drop a note on the WP:ORE talk page to get some more input. Aboutmovies (talk) 21:50, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

Subtlesys.gif

I notice that you have contributed to the discussion at Image talk:Subtlesys.gif and asked for a larger dimensioned image to prove copyright - I have since provided the larger image, and another one further backing my claims - however the editor who has an issue with the image is refusing the evidence. Your opinions on the matter as an outside party would be appreciated. Sfacets 06:08, 25 November 2007 (UTC)

• Okay. Cirt (talk) 06:11, 25 November 2007 (UTC).

Wow, you're on a role

You've been here 2 months and already you have 2 FAs to your credit. Good work!

		The Simpsons (Annoyed Grunt)-star
		For all of your help with the season 9 Featured topic drive, and getting The Joy of Sect to Featured article status. Scorpion0422 03:45, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! And thanks for all of your help! Cirt (talk) 03:48, 26 November 2007 (UTC).

Manson

Thanks for stepping in and taking another step. I was very satisfied with how the article was progressing, and working quite well with another editor (JohnBonaccorsi, who was editing under the anonymous 71.242.203.167). There was a spirit of collaboration and cooperation. Things began to get unpleasant after BassPlyr23 jumped in, between the two of them. Apparently there is a history there. What was frustrating for me was that it trainwrecked the cooperation and became nearly uncivil. Anyway, thanks again. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:33, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Please do keep me informed. I'm old enough to remember when this happened and read the newspaper articles as the events unfolded. I've got a bit of research material already, in the form of books and other publications, although I'm not a conspiracy theorist or "Mansonologist," for lack of a better word. Anything I can do to help! Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:49, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

Not purposefully, but it appears I had my settings to do that. I'll change it. Thanks. Wildhartlivie (talk) 06:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

GA on hold

I have put the GA nomination for Space opera in Scientology scripture on hold for seven days. To be honest, I thought seriously about failing it, but with a lot of work I think it can be brought to GA standards within a week. I will check back in two days for an interim review - please respond on the article talk page below my GA criteria list. Please ask anytime iof you have specific questions, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:36, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Cirt (talk) 22:07, 27 November 2007 (UTC).

Manson page

At the Manson talk page, I've just posted a comment headed "Revision of 21:56, 27 November 2007." If you think you can back me up on this, I'd appreciate it.

PS If I'm violating Wikipedia rules by inviting backup in this way, please let me know.71.242.203.167 (talk) 22:58, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Sorry, but I'm not altogether too interested in focusing on that article at this point in time. It seems to have stirred up some controversy between a few editors, and frankly the amount of content in the article to go through at the moment does not seem appealing to me. But good luck! If you do happen to improve its quality further and feel it's ready for another GA review, let me know. Cirt (talk) 23:01, 27 November 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for the reply. To be honest, I don't even know what a GA is. My only concern is the article's content; I was afraid I was going to encounter resistance as I tried to purge the piece of a non-sentence.71.242.203.167 (talk) 22:55, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I do understand your concerns, but just don't want to get involved right now with that article, sorry. Good luck to you! I encourage you to seek out collaboration on the Peer Review. Cirt (talk) 00:19, 29 November 2007 (UTC).

Don't worry; I should have added that everything worked out. The editor who had nominated the page for GA backed me up quickly, in a way that eliminated the possibility of conflict. — Yes, I saw your Peer Review note on the article's talk page. Thank you — but again: I don't know what Peer Review is. I just want the article to provide solid information to those who come in search of it; I'd rather not draw attention to the article within Wikipedia.71.242.203.167 (talk) 01:13, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad everything worked out. Cirt (talk) 01:14, 29 November 2007 (UTC).

New Imperial Napoleanic Triple Crown

You did know about the new level of award here, right? John Carter (talk) 23:38, 27 November 2007 (UTC)

• Holy Crap Lois! That is truly something to aspire to! Cirt (talk) 23:53, 27 November 2007 (UTC).

Two FAs to go, and you're there. John Carter (talk) 00:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

For a DYK, you don't necessarily have to start a new article. You can take a page that has been a stub for months and improve it substantially, then it would qualify. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• I know, but I have a new article in mind to start. Cirt (talk) 03:53, 28 November 2007 (UTC).

Pageant

Thanks for alerting me to the Triple Crown thing. See the talk page. I think you need to rewrite and expand the plot summary. I gave you an example. -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi. I did a little more work on it. Now most of what is in the plot section is at least about the plot. I moved some technical stuff about how the children are used into the Background section, and you might beef up that paragraph into a clearer explanation about how the show works, how the children are used, how the characters interact, etc. In fact, reading the article without knowing anything about the musical, I wondered what it looks like. Is it very conceptual, or more matter of fact? (This could be described in the background section, citing appropriate reviews). There is no list of characters, so the plot should make it clear who Hubbard meets. Have any notable actors performed in the piece? If so, you could mention and blue-link them. Also, are all the major scenes in the plot now described? There is still too much passive voice: Who is doing what to whom at each point in the story?

I don't think the article is quite ready to be a FA. It seems well referenced, but the prose needs to flow better, and I think it is really too short, without enough analysis of the play itself. There is plenty, however, about the fact that the critics liked it: the question is WHY is it good, and HOW are the themes explored? I think there may be a little too much about the litigation threats in the LEAD, although you do need to mention them briefly and then describe them clearly in the background/history section. There is not much description of the music in the show. Is it rock? Gospel? pop? classical? old-fashioned 40s/50s style show tunes? Some of the reviews must have described the music. There is no songlist. Are all the songs mentioned in the plot summary? If not, I recommend a song list. Then, instead of a track listing for the CD, I would just describe the difference between what is included in the CD and what is in the song list. Compare to Porgy and Bess, Wicked (musical) and West Side Story. I hope this is helpful. -- Ssilvers (talk) 14:57, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, very helpful, thanks, I'll respond on your talk page. Cirt (talk) 15:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC).

I have now supported the FA nomination. Have you now mentioned all of the characters in the plot summary? Or is it really just Hubbard, the brain and the three celebrities? Also, I do like a list of musical numbers that shows which characters sing which numbers, although this information could be added to the track list. In the productions section, are all of the directors mentioned? Probably you should mention who played Hubbard in each cast (is that the only massively large character?). Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:56, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the message. Where you describe each production, you should say: when and where it was presented, the name of the theatre, "starring Joe Blow (or whoever) as L. Ron Hubbard and directed by Jane Blow,"[footnote] and the length of the production's run if known. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Spiffier triple crown, new awards available

The standard triple crown.

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! Durova^Charge! 22:06, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you, I will take a look at all this new stuff going on. You're doing a great job motivating editors to contribute great content! Cirt (talk) 00:18, 29 November 2007 (UTC).

Imperial triple crown jewels

I, Durova, am pleased to award Cirt these imperial triple crown jewels in thanks for superb content contributions to Wikipedia. May you wear them well. Durova^Charge! 01:59, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

• Many thanks, this is truly an honor coming from you. Cirt (talk) 05:37, 29 November 2007 (UTC).

Living Type

Hi. I reverted this edit, this summary hopefully explains why. Cheers, Dihydrogen Monoxide ^♫ 07:55, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Sounds good to me. Congrats on triple crown by the way. Dihydrogen Monoxide ^♫ 08:00, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Who, me? Nah... :P Dihydrogen Monoxide ^♫ 08:03, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

That looks better. FLs are crazy - I mainly took a back seat role on mine, and let Spebi (talk · contribs) or lincalinca (talk · contribs) do most the work...I just reviewed a lot. The key to success is a good team of quality cronies :P Dihydrogen Monoxide ^♫ 08:12, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:Religion in Family Guy

Template:Religion in Family Guy has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. / edg ☺ ☭ 20:21, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Treehouse of Horror (series)

I was wondering if you could take a look at the page. I've been pecking away at it for a week and I think it's in good form (although the reception and merchandise sections are easily the weakest parts). If there are no serious objections, I'm going to give an FAC a try in a few days. So please take a look and let me know what you think. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 02:03, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• I'll take a look, thanks for thinking of me! Cirt (talk) 05:26, 30 November 2007 (UTC).

FTW

Oh em gee doubleyou tee eff bee bee que. Cheers, I'm supremely impressed and laud your work. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 18:41, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

Gots to Give Props...

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For laboriously hammering out quality articles. Your skills are enviable and formidable! Pax Arcane 21:28, 30 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you! Much appreciated. Cirt 21:43, 30 November 2007 (UTC).

New Article

Thats the problem, I don't know any articles that need to be created :/ xihix(talk) 18:17, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

• Responded on your talk page. Now, time for a wikibreak. Cirt (talk) 18:21, 28 November 2007 (UTC).

I do have six Simpsons books, but all of them have been made. Also, for the featured article, the one I have isn't Simpsons related. Unless, you count The Simpsons (season 9), which is a featured list. xihix(talk) 18:24, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I looked through the stubs, and I couldn't see anything that I knew a little about. I suppose I could try and expand Planet Simpson: How a Cartoon Masterpiece Documented an Era and Defined a Generation or The Simpsons and Philosophy: The D'oh! of Homer, but other than having the book next to me, I know nothing of them. I don't know how I'd even expand it to be so big, knowing nothing. xihix(talk) 18:58, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, ok. If we can find sources to cite stuff, then I will. Thats the only part I think I'd have trouble on. xihix(talk) 19:02, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Alright, I'll start to get looking for information... xihix(talk) 19:07, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

I just looked for sources for the book, and I found one, which I don't even think is really a citable reference. Therefore, finding 10 would seem impossible. I'm thinking, instead, of doing something else, but I still have no idea what. xihix(talk) 19:14, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Was wondering... How on earth did you get all those sources!? xihix(talk) 23:09, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

Mostly just lots of searching, but I do have access to more resources online through a library connection, and if need be I travel to a larger library sometimes as well. Cirt (talk) 00:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC).

Ok, I just expanded the article. But, I have no idea how to expand it anymore... I mean, it's only like 2.5x the size of what it originally was. Any tips? xihix(talk) 02:58, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I expanded it a little more, but I really can't expand it for 100 words to make it 5x what it used to be. It may look like you can, but all the sources are really saying the same basic thing. You just can't make up anything else. xihix(talk) 22:51, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

I nominated it. Hopefully it'll be chosen. xihix(talk) 20:11, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, I did use a lot of the sources, but the other ones there are just basically saying the same thing as other sources. More reviews would have been good, but otherwise, nothing. xihix(talk) 02:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Oh, I just remembered. Do you think you could use your library source thingy you mentioned to find me some references for The City of New York Vs. Homer Simpson? I would really appreciate them. Oh, and would you mind if I asked how you have this library source...? xihix(talk) 02:06, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Sounds cool. If you find resources, could you leave them on the talk page of the article? I wish to get the article FA'd by myself by as much as I can. xihix(talk) 02:13, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Won't be too much longer. Winter break is coming up soon for me, so once I finish The City of New York, I can easily GA the remaining articles in about 3-4 days. I dunno why, but GAing Simpsons episodes is so easy for me. I'm aiming to get 50 episodes GA'd, then 100, though it'll be hard. xihix(talk) 02:18, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a look at it, but I don't know if I can really help much (I'm usually the type who needs copy edits himself). Sorry =/ xihix(talk) 02:23, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wow, that was fast, thanks! It's a shame about the McNee one, I'm sure that would provide some really good information about the Post-9/11 information, which is what I am fearing will be the hardest to come by with. It will obviously need a large mention, and from the sources I have you the ones you provided, there is very little to none... xihix(talk) 03:36, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 2 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 1985 Rajneeshee assassination plot, 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.

You are ambitious - they article is being reviewed for GA as it got promoted to DYK! --Royalbroil 02:35, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

• Indeed, I thought it had enough information and sources to go to WP:GAC pretty soon. Cirt 02:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC).

No worry

Thanks for your apology, but there was no need. You are doing a lot of great work here and I have no doubt that you will get Space Opera in Scientology... up to GA and back to FA before too long. A week was just too short a time, but that is all the on-hold allows. Take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:07, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Kevin and Kell GAN

I've carried out the recommendations you asked for, finding more references and including more detail in the "About" and "Reception" sections. I think it is good enough to pass now. ISD 10:26, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, I will take a look soon. Cirt 12:23, 2 December 2007 (UTC).
  • Thanks for passing the article. Cheers! ISD 15:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)
    • Good work, thanks for addressing the points I brought up in the GA review. Cirt 15:51, 2 December 2007 (UTC).

Emmy Awards

Sure, I'll help out where I can. The first order of business is to reformat the page and make it more like Golden Globe Award for Best Director - Motion Picture, which is an FL. I have started work on it here in one of my sandboxes. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:00, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Don't worry, it happens to all of us. We need to find sources for the individual episodes that were nominated. For the post-2000 episodes, we'll probably be able to find online press releases, but it might get tricky for the ones before that. Although IMDB might be a useable source in this case. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:03, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Fine with me. The point of a sandbox is so that you can easily update stuff if you don't have time to fully finish things, and I have to go do some stuff right now. Have fun. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 19:06, 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 00:30, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Great work. Cirt 04:27, 4 December 2007 (UTC).

Evening standard

How can you think an article that says - people are "accused" without declaring that it is only the author that is accusing; calls emails "secret" purely on the basis that they were not addressed to the author; suggests "followers" are being asked to pay £250 for tickets when so is every one else; claims PR has donated £10,000 for the "right" to address the audience before a screening of the film without any evidence and in fact, was never intending to attend etc etc - is "reliable".Momento 07:46, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Reply on user's talk. Again, I would much rather get a response from an editor from WP:RSN who is not regular poster at Talk:Prem Rawat or editor to Prem Rawat - than parse and have a debate between two editors that have already formed opinions about the source itself as reliable or not. Cirt 09:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC).

DYK

On 4 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Psychology of The Simpsons, 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.

--Carabinieri 13:40, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanksomuch. Cirt 13:42, 4 December 2007 (UTC).

Emmys

Hey Cirt, I need a favour (whenever you have time of course). After seeing that you and Scorp were doing the Best Animated Show Emmy list, I decided to do one of my own. Well that was part of the decision, I was looking at Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Drama Series a few days ago, and thought how bad it was... anyway, so I decided to that page. Which I'm building here. Basically all I'm asking is that if you could at some point possibly try and find a reliable source listing every award winner (and preferrably all of the nominations as well) for everything prior to about 2000, and the source isn't the official Emmys database or infoplease. They're the sources I'm using now and I'm finding them quite contradictory, both with the current list and IMDb. Anyway, I've looked and had no luck, and you are alot better at finding excelltent sources than I am. Thanks. Gran² 16:18, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

I should have specified, I'm not questioning their reliablility, and I'm still going to use them in some way. But I think (particularly in the case of the Emmys database), that the sources have mistakes and don't coresspond. An example is the 1969 award: the current Wiki article and IMDb say it was won by Ironside, but the Emmys database says it was won by NET Playhouse. So what I mean is, can you find another source (a book or something), the fully and clearly clarifies all of the winners and nominations for the award. Gran² 16:37, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK comment

That's why it's so important that the DYK next update be changed on time. So many cycles missed and this hurts people who wrote articles and put up hooks! Archtransit 21:11, 4 December 2007 (UTC)

Hell Is Other Robots peer review

I'm going to respond to User:kww's comments once I've fully composed my thoughts, probably later this evening. I thought you might be interested to know where that came from though. Those particular comments come from a discussion at User_talk:Jack_Merridew#Hugo which started at Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Episodes_and_characters/Workshop#All_sides_warned. I asked him to bring his comments to either the article talk or peer review because I didn't think that needed to be on somebody else's user talk page and also I thought you might be interested to see that opinion. I also think it would be beneficial if anybody uninvolved with the article replied to it at peer review but I don't know if anyone will. Just thought you should know the history since I'm sure some of that came as a shock to you. I knew some people were against having episode articles but I was surprised they would feel that strongly about them to eliminate even the well done ones. Stardust8212 00:29, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks, good to know. Cirt (talk) 00:30, 5 December 2007 (UTC).

The Wiz

Hello. I hesitated to review the article because I haven't been an editor for that long, but since I didn't see anything specifying a required length of service to Wikipedia I thought I would give it a shot. I believe I followed all the necessary steps and hope I did everything correctly. Please let me know if I made any errors. Thank you. MovieMadness (talk) 15:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

• Will respond on user's talk page. Cirt (talk) 15:47, 5 December 2007 (UTC).

Thanks for your helpful comments. I moved the article to the top of the list of Recently listed good articles at WP:GA and removed the last to limit the list to 15 as specified. When formatting my GA review, I tried to use {{PGAN}}, but I couldn't figure out how to edit the comments as they appeared on the template, so I just cut and pasted it and edited them accordingly. Next time I'll know to put them at the bottom. MovieMadness (talk) 16:06, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm curious, when you add {{PGAN}} to the talk page, why does it give you the following rather than the simplified form you sent me?

{{PGAN}} Everything within the {{ }} following each of the questions confused me. Thanks for the explanation. MovieMadness (talk) 16:19, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 5 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Back Stage West Garland Awards, 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.

--Mrs.EasterBunny (talk) 21:03, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

---

You're not an admin? Oh heck, I thought you were. I guess we'll have to wait then. Gatoclass (talk) 10:17, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

• I am not interested in becoming an Admin at this point in time (Thus the userbox). Cirt (talk) 10:19, 6 December 2007 (UTC).

Oh okay I didn't see the infobox on your main page. I'm not terribly interested in adminship either, but since I became interested in DYK I have thought of applying just so I'd have the power to update the page when it is overdue, which happens a lot. Gatoclass (talk) 10:23, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that would be one benefit, because DYK does get backlogged and occasionally there are other good people around that could do it who are not Admins. Cirt (talk) 10:26, 6 December 2007 (UTC).

A stamp from the real me

Hello Cirt. Very odd situation, seems like Vatomanocu was a user attempting to impersonate me. He was blocked as a sockpuppet of Mike Garcia. Still, you thanked me for something I didn't do, so in order to fix that here's another stamp for you. From Húsönd this time, guaranteed. :-) Best regards, Húsönd 17:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Here's a stamp from the Faroe Islands for you! Stamps from the Faroe Islands somehow promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving something friendly to someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Make your own message to spread WikiLove to others! Happy editing! Húsönd 17:41, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for catching my typo on Lions for Lambs. I think I brushed the key when I hit save (or something careless like that). My bad.
Jim Dunning | talk 22:50, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Pop quizzzz!

Okay, if you were going to redesign Wikipedia's Contents pages...how would you do it? ;-) RichardF (talk) 04:16, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

• I'll take a look.. Cirt (talk) 10:40, 8 December 2007 (UTC).

Thanks, I replied. :-) RichardF (talk) 16:10, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

DYK

On 8 December, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Leipzig Human Rights Award, 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.

--Carabinieri (talk) 19:17, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Simpsons

Do you think we should only limit it to one per person? Or maybe do a few more for Groening? Ctjf83 ^talk 16:22, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL, you don't own the DVDs?? But ok, sounds like a good idea, i'm not a big fan of watching the commentary, but i'll keep my ears open. Ctjf83 ^talk 16:27, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Have you by chance ever seen It's a Wonderful Life? Ctjf83 ^talk 22:17, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Well i'm watchin the commentary for Miracle on Evergreen Terrace and they mentioned it, but i've never seen it, so i dont get the reference they are making to it...but i forgot u don't have the DVDs, so are you able to help at all? Ctjf83 ^talk 22:21, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

give me a minute, i'll replay it...otherwise if u don't know, i can ask scorpion or gran for help Ctjf83 ^talk 22:25, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

i'll just type it anyway, gotta type it here or there anyway....i think it is matt says it is a "wierd misreading" of it, and where homer yells at lisa for playing the piano i think mike says for "kids who haven't seen it, it looks like homer is being really mean to lisa"...and Yeardly says something about ZouZou or something, lol i could atleast but it down as a CR of the movie Ctjf83 ^talk 22:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

well i guess someone already typed it under the CR section of the show..but i'd like to source it too Ctjf83 ^talk 22:31, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

ok, i'll just ask to c if the other 2 have seen it, to give me more insight..thanks! Ctjf83 ^talk 22:33, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

someone put this is the 3rd christmas episode...is it, i'm thinking it is only the 2nd....plus, what should i put in the lead and where else should i find reception info? Ctjf83 ^talk 19:19, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

Miracle on Evergreen Terrace..is it the 2nd or 3rd Christmas episode...i'm only thinking 2nd, but someone put 3rd? Ctjf83 ^talk 19:22, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

can u fix it on my user page so it looks like the other quote section....not sure how to Ctjf83 ^talk 09:59, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

Looks great!! I'll come to you with all my issues related to that! :)...but since it is 4:15 am, i'm off to bed...curious, where do you live though? Night!! Ctjf83 ^talk 10:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

while you're doing stuff for me...can u tell me why when i got to preferences, and try to change the watchlist form 7 to 30 days, it doesn't work...i follow the instructions and "bypass your browser's cache" but it doesn't work, do u know why? I am still going to bed, but if you can tell me how to fix it, i'll look when i wake up Ctjf83 ^talk 10:18, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

LOL LAME answer!!! night Ctjf83 ^talk 10:19, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

eh, sleep is for the weak...lol, my wiki addiction is ridiculous...do u know who i can ask? is there a tech support office or something? Ctjf83 ^talk 10:22, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

ahh, that was some good sleep! do you just wanna fix the Miracle on Evergreen Terrace lead to your standards? Ctjf83 ^talk 19:01, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

This is your friendly reminder! Ctjf83 ^talk 19:38, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

I just saw ur random pictures post on my talk...the pics look good on the portal...much like all your other work!! ;) Ctjf83 ^talk 19:50, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

looks fabulousssss.....so do we just add quotes to the quote thing u made, or are we voting, or what? Ctjf83 ^talk 21:16, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

well then who decides? you, the project? Ctjf83 ^talk 21:17, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

is it limited to a one-liner....or r we doing a brief convo between 2 ppl? Ctjf83 ^talk 21:23, 9 December 2007 (UTC)

i missed the other Abe one....perhaps a running tally? Ctjf83 ^talk 04:29, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

a system?! lol...i was just thinkin, list seasons in order, and put how many from that season, adn put character's names alphabetical...obviously dont list if they have 0 Ctjf83 ^talk 04:35, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

lol, now u want me to do work?!? i'll see what i can do...we can "run" this together, if u like Ctjf83 ^talk 04:39, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

lol, ok, u can run it all urself, if thats what u want Ctjf83 ^talk 04:42, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

ok, i'll see what kind of tally i can put together...btw, u didnt answer if it is limited to a one-liner....or r we doing a brief convo between 2 ppl? Ctjf83 ^talk 04:46, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

i'm thinking of making Portal:The Simpsons/Character quote/Nominations so as if we get lots of quotes, it doesn't clog up the page with noms and actual quotes. that way at the top it can say limit to 1 or 2 per person/season, and then under it can be the noms. whatcha think? Ctjf83 ^talk 04:52, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

lol, touche Ctjf83 ^talk 04:54, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

i'm working on that...perhaps we shouldn't limit the seasons..as that will only give us 38 quotes as long as we limit the person saying it, does it mater which season? Ctjf83 ^talk 05:11, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

well look at the talk, and clean up as u feel warrants...and if possible, on the portal page where it says "Archive/Nominations" link noms to the talk page Ctjf83 ^talk 05:20, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

well is it possible to leave the arch link, and link the noms half to the talk, or not? Ctjf83 ^talk 05:24, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Congrats!

Just saw Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 14, 2007 - congratulations! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:06, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for letting me know! Cirt (talk) 04:15, 10 December 2007 (UTC).