My fault, this one. I noticed that the WP article is called "Wicket-keeper" so changed it unilaterally. I agree that wicket-keeper-batsman looks cack. Hmmm. The Rambling Man10:43, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I suggest someone posts at WT:CRIC. An option is moving the article to "Wicketkeeper" and using cricketbot to amend all articles. But I strongly prefer "wicket-keeper". However, I'm stumped (boom boom) about the w/k/batsman thingy. --Dweller10:48, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thats a shame. The admin tools are automatic when promoted - no monobook changes required... looks like we'll have to get you sorted there I guess! ;) Glen02:36, 3 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey Dweller, I'm out of touch all of today, so won't be able to continue the crusade. I'll get over to Blnguyen's comments asap. See we did okay against Bermuda! Laters... The Rambling Man08:25, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Good work on this. We should all AGF more often :) Small point, though - could you please make sure to substitute all user warnings and templates? There are, well, a lot of good reasons for this, and it's far too early in the day for me to get into them, but trust me on this one :) Thanks. – riana_dzasta20:29, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi. Thanks for the compliment and the well-intentioned comment, which I do understand. See above, User_talk:Dweller#subst. Glen tried amending my monobooks to help me with some non-admin tools, but while I could see their utility, they utterly baffled my laptop. I know it's lazy and arrogant of me, but the bots do catch up and I think my fingers are better utilised in building the encyclopedia and dealing with vandalism. --Dweller20:33, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. Yeah, fair enough. I'm just one of those crazy OCD people who can't stand to see an un-subst'd template :) Keep up the great work, and happy editing. – riana_dzasta21:07, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't mind your involvement at all -- it's great when other users try to diffuse situations, particularly since my involvement here is limited by my crazy work schedule. The problem with the article is that it has undergone an AFD (Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Jewdar (2nd nomination)). The other problem is that it has already been userfied - see User:Weirdoactor/Jewdar. The userfication has all the edit history; what the user did was copy and paste the article back into the namespace, which is a no-no. Personally, I'm more bothered by the editor's attitude and incivility than I am by the article itself. -- Merope20:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, it is a little odd. I hadn't realised it's already userfied. I'm not sure why he'd want it userfied twice. Userfying's not a great idea anyway, as (as I pointed out to him) eventually, someone will come along and AfD it! My thinking with the "stub in user space" idea, was to "start again", with a very short article that only seeks to establish notability. Everyone, but particularly newbies, hates to see loads of work going down the AfD pan (been there!) and it's likely to create a resentful attitude in some people... one that can be turned around. If he has the chance to try to establish notability, it's a win-win - either he sees that he can't, or he succeeds. Maybe I'm too optimistic :-) --Dweller20:53, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
ummm.......... you told me to 'drop a line' here so i think this is what you ment.
Umm ok i get the budgie thing and i will try and find some info on them. But still can you write about caring for them? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jeanca (talk • contribs)
Okay, but I have a couple of conditions. I'd be glad to coach you, but I request that you wait on going for an RfA until I think you are ready. Also, keep in mind that it's not admin coaching per se, it's general coaching about all aspects of Wikipedia. If these two points are okay with you, then let's get started... You're just in time to be a guinea pig for my new coaching method -- assignments! One of my other coachees has asked to help create the next lesson for the Virtual Classroom, and so that would be the perfect assignment for the two of you. It's posted at User:The Transhumanist/Virtual classroom/The purposes and functions of lists on Wikipedia. The Transhumanist18:51, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I accept your conditions. I'm not ready for RfA. If I wasn't aware of it anyway, I had a nice reminder of it with my incorrect speedy tagging today. I'll take a look at your page tonight/tomorrow and will decline any and all invitations to RfA until you think I'm ready; so long as you remain active at Wikipedia (think it's worth adding that rider!). Thank you very much! --Dweller19:01, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Nope. I always hated weeder classes. They weren't designed to teach, only to test. Tests are fine by me, after the teacher has done his job. I believe that a student's performance on a test is as much a reflection of the teacher's effectiveness at teaching as it is an indication of the student's grasp of the subject being tested.
A good starting point would be to place {{VC assignments}} at the top of your talk page where you can easily access it. The current lesson needs proofreading. You might also know some helpful links that I missed. The list lesson also needs proofreading, and completion. Any help you could provide on either lesson would be most appreciated. In the next few days, I'll create a coaching section for you on the VC. Keep an eye out for it. The Transhumanist11:17, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To speed things up, and help with the backlog at the same time
And if you want to move ahead more quickly, my strongest advice is for you to become an Admin Coach. There isn't any rule against being a coachee and a coach at the same time. You can set up subsections for your students in the Coaching section of the VC, if you like. One thing I do for all my students is analyze their contributions - using Interiot's edit counter, and by poring through the contribs list manually, using popups to take a look at the diffs (it's recursive, so you can look at popups inside popups). I go in deeper (view the whole page) if I spot something unusual or interesting, exceptionally good/bad, etc. Then I point out areas they should work on.
I see you use popups. There are some other scripts you might want to add to your account. See the instructions at the top of my tools page for an ultra fast way to turbocharge your user account.
What method do you use for searching and replacing?
Hi. Sorry it's taken me so long to reply to this. You may no longer be watching this (because it's several days ago!) so I'll reply to your talk page. I am usually much faster at replying... Real Life interferes too much sometimes :-) --Dweller09:44, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I am tentatively trying to get started again. Thanks again for at least making a neutral comment. Here is the last bit of communication. I remain disgusted by the imbalance, and maintain that someone other than a simple contributor should have bothered to read the relevant page histories and note the policy violations going on on the other side, but can't see the point of doing anything procedural, right now at least. However, I think that the chronology would give me good grounds, but obviously it would or will be time-consuming to track the whole thing down. Please have a look at my very plain user page, the first couple of sentences seem to have a particular relevance right now. Thanks again.FasterPussycatWooHoo12:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your message. Glad you're back. I keep my use of userboxes very low. I think you're right to adopt a strategy of just getting on with it. If you need a "friend", feel free to drop me a line whenever. --Dweller15:21, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dweller. I don't often close AFDs, so I don't feel like I'm the best judge of when to close one early. Teenage Cancer Trust is an article worth keeping, but I think you'd do better to find a regular AFD-closer to take care of it. Sorry, FreplySpang21:39, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'll address all of your concerns if I can in the next day or two (Warhol13 has already addressed several of them) but here is the answer to your objection 9 ("He quickly became a fan favorite for his exciting high flying style of play and daring drives to the basket". This is referenced twice, but both are member-only access. Please could someone post here what the sources say.) Excerpts from some of the sources are already in the FAC but as the FAC is becoming long and confusing I'll reprint excerpts from both of the sources here: This is from a NY Times article during the 1984 pre-season, "The Knicks, depleted by injuries, played an exhibition game last night but that's not what caught the attention of crowd of 15,239 at Madison Square Garden last night. The fans came to see the Chicago Bulls' rookie Michael Jordan, the star of the 1984 United States Olympic basketball team, and he did not disappoint them.
From the time the Bulls started to warm up until Jordan left the game for good in the third quarter, the crowd applauded his every move.
During warm-ups, so many fans converged under the Bulls' basket that the Garden announcer had to ask them to return to their seats. As if sensing what the crowd wanted, the smiling Jordan dunked the ball several times.
Returns as Small Forward
He was even more impressive in the game. The former North Carolina star, who chose to pass up his senior year, played 25 minutes, shot 10 for 15 from the field, scored 23 points and grabbed a team-high 7 rebounds.
Playing as the shooting guard alongside Ennis Whatley, Jordan dazzled the crowd with a spurt of first- period scoring.
But the part of his performance the crowd seemed to enjoy the most came late in the second period, when Jordan returned as a small forward and made all four attempts from the field while matched against Bernard King. Trent Tucker and Darrell Walker guarded Jordan when he played in the backcourt. 'You Have to Get Help'"[2]
...And this one is from a description of his seventh game and his first trip to Madison Square Garden by the NY Times, "The Knicks lost their sixth consecutive game, but overshadowing that was the first regular-season New York appearance of Michael Jordan, the phenomenal rookie of the Bulls.
Jordan left the crowd aghast. He scored from over, under and around the basket, as well as from the outside. The 6-foot-6-inch guard did it with dunks and nifty drives.
By the time he snatched the ball from a helpless Ernie Grunfeld and dashed for a flying one-handed dunk that gave the Bulls a 23-point lead at the end of the third period, the crowd was standing, voicing approval for nearly a minute. Jordan, who played 33 minutes, finished with 33 points, 8 rebounds, 5 assists, 3 steals and 2 blocked shots.
That display left even the resident crowd-pleaser, Bernard King - who had a game-high 34 points - wondering how effective the former North Carolina player will be once he has gained experience.
"I'll hate to see that," King said. "Maybe he'll be in the Western Conference by then."[3] Furthermore, even though the sentence in question is obviously true and unbiased, it was re-worded by Warhol just to satisfy editors who complained about such things so have a look see. Quadzilla9903:53, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Brilliant. I've had an Internet "outage" all day, so haven't been able to take a look and am unlikely to have time again for a few days. See you soon! Thanks, --Dweller15:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Those statements were actually removed, I think all of your concerns were addressed in detail, if you get a chance have look. Quadzilla9909:36, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, from a fellow student! You're in good hands here - don't hesitate to ask The Transhumanist at the classroom, or via email. If he's not around, I might be able to shed some light on the matter! anthonycfc[talk]05:47, 11 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No not really, I am trying to put it into some form of order, so that what is repetitious can more easily be weeded out, and some sort of chronological order - I think it will be easier for others to edit if where to pace information is more easily obvious. At the moment it is too trpretitious etc. It needs a lot more work indeed -please don't let me put you off! Giano14:09, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Cheers, lol. I've done some time at that article in the best (check the History) and nommed it at WP:ACID, where it failed at 16 votes. Ho hum. I've got my hands full at the moment with "serious" projects here, as opposed to minimal tinkerings. But I do plan to revisit at some point. --Dweller14:31, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well looking at my talk it seems my attentions are not required - at least somebody is interested which has to be good. I'll let him get on with it, I don't like being reverted before I have established a format or even written one word of text. To be honest I think it is too embracing and large a sunject for one page, it needs to focus on Europe, and have the more oriental architecture elsewhere. Regards. Giano09:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
One of the earliest representations of a castle from the Bayeux Tapestry.
In reference to this statement "I have a more serious problem with that image. It's nonsense. A motte is an artificial construct. The huge boulder outcrops are unhistorical and grossly misleading." If you are talking about the Bayeux tapestry pic then you are out to lunch re history of castles. The tapestry is an internationally recognized primary reference for castle construction and development. CJ DUB13:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I was referring to the one posted on Giano's talk page of what he thought looked like something a kid made at school. I did point out that I was crossposting from Giano's page, for your convenience. Calling me "out to lunch" is uncivil, even if I had been referring to the tapestry. --Dweller13:42, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, I'm just very tired of so called experts cutting half-decent pages to hell before anybody has a chance to improve them. By the way, the model that you guys hate is from the Bayeux tapestry museum. And yes, some mottes were built on existing rock formations. Otherwise the model is typical of museum diaramas, and its 3D which helps kids, anyway. I'll look for something without boulders if its that much of a problem. CJ DUB15:15, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]File:Tapisserie motte maquette.jpgMotte-and-bailey castle.
Don't worry about it CJ DUB, this "so-called expert" is quite hapy to let you get on with it. Next time I stumble across and Article improvement drive I shall stay well away. I look forward to reading the page when you have finished it. Giano16:05, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Righto. LOL. A guy who says that the primary reference of the Bayeux tapestry is something "which sheds no light whatsoever" has no business doing major edits on a page on castles. CJ DUB18:29, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
You mentioned on the cricket project talk page perhaps making our man a collaboration to try to cement his notability in the minds of all. I thought I'd better go back in and reference properly the parts that I wrote (instead of just a blanket catch-all reference), so there are now 25 footnotes on the piece. There's probably a few other places I could dig out the proper references, but I'm now away for a day or two, so can't manage that for a bit. Johnlp22:47, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
How you doing? I'm still desperately pushing Gilchrist's article, it's run out of steam a bit but we're 100% support apart from Blnguyen who's said he'll have another look - he's withdrawn his oppose but wants time to read our current version. Hopefully FA soon otherwise a new section will have to be added and someone will moan about the article not being stable...! Anyways, I see you're doing the virtual classroom thing, you showing the signs of interest in RFA? Hmm?? The Rambling Man09:16, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi there. I'm concerned that Blnguyen's edit summary counterbalances his removal of "object" and will persuade Raul to hang fire on promotion until Blnguyen returns. Blnguyen's been getting some flak at the Admin noticeboards, poor chap. I trust he'll be able to defend himself adequately, but it's understandably unpleasant needing to do so and while it's "live". Yes, I'm interested in RfA. I'm not ready yet - my grasp of policy needs further sharpening, which is why I requested coaching. Transhumanist's conditions for accepting me for coaching included me not standing until he thinks I'm ready, something I was happy to agree to. There's no rush and, like I say, I know I'm not ready. --Dweller09:20, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've had two more offers of nomination, both within the space of a few hours rather strangely. I politely declined them both, primarily because of the enjoyment I've got out of all this FA drive stuff. I'm going to go vandal whacking for a while today I think, until a new project pops into my head, although I have told the Cats Wikiproject that I intend to do some work on their big cat pages, no reason why they shouldn't be GA at the very least. Let me know if you want to do anything on the side as it were while you're doing the coaching thing... The Rambling Man09:24, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Lol. Cool. (for cats). I'm planning to nom you for admin in a week or two. I think that'd be sufficient time since your unsuccessful RfA. You've more than addressed the serious issues and the not so serious issues raised. I hope you'll accept when I come to it. If you do, I'll ask the Transhumanist to co-nom, if you think that's appropriate. (He may say no!) Have you seen the advice he's given me at the virtual classroom? Good stuff. Re our collaboration, when we get going again, I plan on contributing to Cricket before we unleash our demonic plan to FA the two Pride of Anglia clubs. --Dweller09:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'll be Colchester United and Luton then?! I would be surprised if TH co-nom's me, his standards are pretty high... Hope you're enjoying the VC stuff. The Rambling Man10:04, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That's cool! I have nothing against featuring these articles. I only requested for featuring articles from non-English-Non Western areas too. For sure, Jocelin and Ian Thorpe do not enjoy 2 billions of audience. Take care. SangakTalk11:34, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
lol. As the English-language Wikipedia, it's natural that there's a preponderance of editors interested in / capable of developing FAs on topics with a weighting towards English language cultures. You can join in the debate about which FA appears on the Main Page when. You can also help develop some FAs in other areas. Don't be put off trying to do this. A small collaboration of editors I'm part of has just managed to get 2 articles to FA and a third imminent in a very short period of time. --Dweller11:38, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Well! English wikipedia is an international collaborative project, while most wikipedias in other languages are not. English wikipedia needs to observe world view.SangakTalk13:40, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think Colly or Gilly are a problem, both images, as far as I remember, are self-made and released under GFDL so we can use them without fear. The Rambling Man12:59, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
They all have free license tags, and they certainly look like user-generated content. Looks like you don't have any problems. ed g2s • talk12:43, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Yes the threshold is often a subject of debate, as can be seen at WP:FUC. Generally the popular opinion is to use more Fair Use, whereas the Foundation and the old-timers want to see much less of it. ed g2s • talk17:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There have been two Anglo-Indians/Pakistanis who have played Test cricket - Duncan Sharpe and Roger Binny. I don't think any pure whites have played for free India/Pakistan/SL/BD. There might be someone like J. G. Greig who may have played for Indian team against some touring team in pre-independent India. Or are you looking for someone who stayed back after 1947 and appeared in domestic cricket ? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tintin1107 (talk • contribs) 13:25, 14 March 2007 (UTC).[reply]
Hi, thanks for that. No, I think he wanted a white person who'd played Test cricket, like some West Indians. A "no" is a perfectly good answer to go back with. Ta, --Dweller13:29, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, just popping by to say thanks a bunch for supporting my sucessfull Rfa, I'm honoured to serve the community, and if you ever want any assisstance, you know where to find me - lets just hope I can carry on being as well reasoned as you've found me before ;-) Cheers Ryanpostlethwaitecontribs/talk18:05, 14 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I'm very confused now. A comment on JackofOz's talk page led me to check the dialogue I linked to, and ... well but now it all looks different, I feel really foolish. Confusion is depressing. Best leave it that then, sorry for the false alarm. Yeah, I believe it's Barringa, in fact by retracing the posts at the desks it should be possible to prove, but, as sadly demonstrated here, I can't rely on anything I think I saw. Take care. ---Sluzzelintalk11:02, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
My awful, terrible mistaken confusion of names beginning with D has caused pain and stress to you, and I sincerely apologize. I have tried to make the necessary changes and apologies wherever I did so; if I missed anything, please let me know.
Apologies as well, for possibly inflating this with my false alarmist statements. I'm glad part of the confusion has been lifted (thanks to both of you), and think it's on the right course now, thanks to Dweller's helpful reaction and posting it at AN/I on my behalf. ---Sluzzelintalk14:55, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'm getting to work on your work on your concerns, someone removed the source for that B.J. Armstrong statement and I reworded the section you tagged. Quadzilla9912:38, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Hope you agree it's an improvement. I'm not objecting to the FA but I might pop in every so often with an observation. --Dweller14:59, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey :-) Nice. I've been reading the policy "Pump" since you suggested it (you might even find a post from me there!) but I've not been to Proposals for a good while. I'll "rewatchlist" it. --Dweller21:35, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh heh... thanks for the revert of my talk page. Ever since 300 came out, there's been an army of wannabe Spartans and "instant experts" attacking every Wikipedia page related to the subject. I've been getting some flak from the anons for my reverts and page protections. I stepped away from the computer for a few minutes, and they got me. :) KafzielTalk21:45, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No problem. I owe you for explaining yourself earlier and teaching me "the ways of the admin". Not that inane vandalism shouldn't be reverted anyway!!! --Dweller21:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Since we've got a history page now, should we aim to just have one single section about the history, like Arsenal, without all the subdivisions? It'd just mean that each section that's currently there will need precising, picking the most important/relevant lines out and maybe rewriting a bit here and there? The Rambling Man10:58, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
That'd be nice. I've been gently heading that way... Btw, I've left a number of messages on the article talk page. Think you've only spotted the last one. It seems there's been quite a bit of tosh put in the article at one time or another, so we need to be careful. --Dweller11:00, 16 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, you'll probably already know that I've put ITFC up for peer review, things seem (note: seem) to be going okay so far. I'm going to be on-and-offline until Sunday afternoon, visiting the abroad folks and all that jazz, so while neither of us actually own this article, I'm trusting you with the custodianship of ITFC until I return. No Goss references please...! I'll be around tomorrow but after that expect not a lot for a while - I think I'll even miss both the Eng vs Ken & Eng vs Israel games. Bad timing. The Rambling Man22:16, 19 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hurrah, great work on cutting the history section down a bit. I've added a bit more on the amateur seasons and a section in the popular culture about Escape to Victory. I think we're done... The Rambling Man17:42, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi coach. I'm busy working on two new FA bids, but not so busy that I have forgotten about the coaching. I had one excellent question at the VC, and would welcome more. I've signed up for AMA but haven't yet taken a case... plan to do that. Other than that, I've taken your advice about reading policies and keeping up with stuff at the various boards you suggested (you might have seen me occasionally contributing). Other than the AMA, what's next? (PS I'm waiting for Vandal Proof, which I'll be able to install on the machine I'm running Firefox from) --Dweller10:06, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Is an emailed response to me by the photographer sufficient? The article doesn't really cover what to do after sending the request. --Dweller12:37, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
There are some things to keep in mind about this one. From what I've seen, the Advocee is affiliated with the article in question and seems to be angry at an editor who reverted their changes. You'll want to be careful in bringing up WP:COI so not to cause them distress, but also ensure that they are properly represented in the article. If you hit a snag, don't hesitate to get in contact with me. :-) אמרSteve Caruso(desk/AMA) • Give Back Our Membership!21:31, 21 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I'd quite like it if you and some of your coachees, quizzed me more. LuckyLuke's question grilled me on application of policy, which was great (how did I do, btw?). I'd like more like that. I'd also appreciate some critical diff-based querying of my editing and user-interaction. What say you? --Dweller10:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ah. Spotted extensions comments (installed linky and chatzilla last night) but I can only use Firefox on one machine. Not seen round 2 replies. On way! --Dweller17:24, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now that the new lesson is up at the VC and the (sidebar) proposals I was working on have run their course, I need a wikibreak.
I would really appreciate it if you and Anthony would watch over the VC while I'm gone, and coach the other participants there. You guys have plenty of experience to pass along, so I have every confidence in you.
The key to coaching is to keep things interesting. You guys are very creative, and you'll do just fine.
P.S. Since people will continue to post to my talk page even if I put up Wiki-break signs, I'd also appreciate it if you would answer messages there for me. There may be requests for help, info, etc.
Roger, wilco. TRM is a pretty helpful bloke... I'm sure he will do. I'll be offline a bit around Easter time, but I can keep an eye on things. --Dweller19:23, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, we're up and running as you well know, with your COI support! I think all peer review comments have been responded to and dealt with accordingly. Depending on how keen you are, you could let the reviewers know that we've dealt with their comments and link them to the FAC nom? I don't think it's canvassing, it's probably good form to let folks know how we're progressing. I'm off to bed very soon, my flight is 0615 and I'm nearly an hour away from the airport... zzzz. Nice work. Three FA's in two months with two more in the pot and one (Goochie?!) mooted. All good. More Sunday. The Rambling Man20:38, 22 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ta. The editor who drew it to my attention has done a splendid job of completing them himself. I'll use them as a template in future. --Dweller14:40, 23 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, I'm back from a lonnnnng weekend. Made a few tinkerings but looks like you've got it mostly under control, all support except Buc. I've sourced a panoramic photo of Portman Road from a colleague who has agreed to release it to Wikipedia under GFDL, thought it was a good 'summary' photo of Porterloo Road so replaced the stand picture with this one. Can't think of anything else that needs to be done. Good work with dealing with the comments... and well done on the footie barnstar! The Rambling Man16:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to thank you for your support in my recent RFA. As you may or may not be aware, it passed with approximately 99% support. I ensure you that I will use the tools well, and if I ever disappoint you, I am open to recall. If you ever need anything, don't hesitate to leave me a note on my talkpage. Thanks again, ^demon[omg plz]20:39, 25 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, just read the conclusion of ALoan's discussion, fine by me, although it seems strange to think that Colly and Gilly are FA and WG & DonB aren't! Just popped over to NCFC to see your photos, self-made?! Very nice. Did you see that I'd slightly modified the panorama position of Portman Road? I think we're nearly there on that one... The Rambling Man12:43, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
No, not self-made. I made contact with a group of NCFC supporters and some photos have been coming in. Also have some of Carra Rud and of filming of Mike Basset(!) Yes, Portaloo Rd looks much better now. I'm quite keen on my manifesto commitment to O'Reilly; it would help with the perennial arguments. And he was, undoubtedly, one of the greats (and an interesting man, to boot) But I won't drag you kicking and screaming! What if... ITFC, NCFC, Bill O'R and then GAG? --Dweller12:49, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good to me.... Or do we face the wrath of being too niche? Perhaps FA something neither of us know anything about? Dunno what though... The Rambling Man12:51, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Now, that sounds a good idea. Insert some oddity between NCFC and Bill O? Should be an easy win in terms of image(s) and WP:V IMHO. I once found a place where people asked for xyz to become FA. Know where that is? --Dweller12:55, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hm, no I don't - I thought it might be redirected from WP:RFA (e.g. Requests for Featured Article) but no joy. Ho hum. So what do you reckon, if you had to pick something out of a hat? The Rambling Man13:19, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey! You started without us! (Great job btw...) --Dweller 20:12, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
No, not really. I'd done that a couple of months ago when it was last in dispute (about priority of notability with the commentator) and just thought I ought to ref it properly if someone else wanted to take it on to GA or FA. It's all yours to do with as you will. My random pottering around in the cricketing backwoods doesn't really include going for gongs, but shout if you want a hand on this one at least. Johnlp23:24, 26 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Oh heck, do yourself justice. You've done brilliantly. If someone did decide to take it on, it's in fine shape for heading to FA. --Dweller08:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, didn't mean to sound self-effacing. What I meant was that I like writing the stuff much more than polishing and referencing and all those sub-editing tasks that have go into a GA or an FA and that you and TRM are so good at. That was all. Johnlp20:58, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Heh. I see from your page that you support Norwich. I have a soft spot for them after their season in the Premiership and keep an eye out for their Championship performance. Anyhow, I left a comment re. your merger proposal for Pollutants Standards Index. – Chacor14:19, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not merge how weather affects PSI with pollutants standard index as it is not pollutants and its pollutant. Sorry but can i request for a page itself? Thank you. Please do not merge them.—Preceding unsigned comment added by Weatherers (talk • contribs)
Please contribute to the ongoing discussion on the article's talk page. Please also sign your talk page posts with four "tildes" (~~~~). Thanks. --Dweller14:23, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hey, looks like we suffered a pair of hit-and-run FAC opposers. Don't know what to do about it, I suppose just grin and bear it and focus on budgies? The Rambling Man16:13, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Two opposes from Buc & Tony1, despite fixing their specifics, nothing back from them yet. Perhaps impatience on my behalf. I'm tired, and had a crappy day so apologies if I'm not making sense. More tomorrow work permitting... The Rambling Man21:43, 27 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
For NCFC, write a to-do list on the talk page, and then, once we get in down to a manageable amount, we'll peer review it. I've converted the records to prose and tablified the honours a la ITFC so that's a good start. We'll need to combine the reigns of the various managers who ruled more than once (freaks!) unless we can get citable stats for each individual period, the crest stuff needs more work and the recentism needs work (as does the early history)... That's for starters... The Rambling Man17:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, Dweller. Have you had a look at the Humanities Desk recently (the Falklands question)? I've just been bitten by a rabid Scottish nationalist! I love the Scots, truly I do; but it often seems to me that it is not so much a chip they have on the collective national shoulder, more of a chasm! All the best. Clio the Muse01:34, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds daft I know, but it's only just occured to me that the second v in rvv stands for vandalism! I'll watch that in future, thanks for the heads up. →Ollie (talk • contribs) 13:48, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I've finished joining it up. It's got far too much recent information, and is still in three sections (easier for editing right now I suppose) so can you hack-n-slash out the unnecessary recentisms and then join up the sections when you get a chance? Then I'll do a copyedit of the whole section... We're getting there! The Rambling Man17:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I came back to wrap up the "loose end" of the contents pages on the contents pages nav bar. Health is now included in the menus at the top of all of them that have menus, and the subject structured for future expansion. Mission accomplished.
Thank you for your Support on my recent nomination for adminship, which passed with a final tally of 89/1/1. It's good to see that you still edit here, after so many months, and don't worry, I have noticed your editor review, and will post on it in a day or two, when I have some time to be nice and/or human for once. If there's anything I can help with, then you know where to find me. Cheers.
So, in your wikibreak, I've dared go for a peer review of NCFC. I'm pretty sure it'll all be fine!!!! Anyway, hopefully by the time you return from your break there'll be a bunch of things to deal with, but I thought it better to get the whole thing up and running. Shout at me when you return... The Rambling Man23:06, 30 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]
