User talk:Figureskatingfan/Archive 13

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

→

Archive 20

Good Article Recruiter Request

Hi, I saw your name on List of Good Article Review Recruiters. Are you still available to help teach people how to review articles nominated for Good Article status? If so, I'm interested in reviewing IBM Watson and would appreciate a mentor to help me through my first GA review. DElliott (talk) 12:36, 15 September 2013 (UTC)

Sure, no problem. Did you want to go through the formal process, or just have me observe you? Either way is fine with me. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:45, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

Great, thanks! I could create a sandbox on my user page and go through it there before I post it into the formal review page? That might help us catch any mistakes I make. DElliott (talk) 10:32, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

No, just start the review on the official page, so we can reduce the queue, which is always long, you know. I'll create a page through the nomination centre and we'll communicate there. Just inform the nominator that we're using the article for this purpose, that it may take a little longer to complete the review than normal, and that it's essentially being reviewed by two people. I've found that most editors are fine with this, since the more feedback the better and their ultimate goal is improving articles they care enough to put through the GAC process. Let me know if you need assistance with starting the review. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 13:30, 17 September 2013 (UTC)

GA

Hi I am interested in becoming a GA reviewer.Will you please teach me and hence take me as a recruitee?RRD13 (talk) 08:53, 22 September 2013 (UTC)

Same answer as above: sure, if you're okay with things moving a little slowly. Should I go ahead and start a page for us, then? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:03, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

I have just one question.After I pass the article how will I make it a good article.I mean I have read all the instructions but still I am confused.I will like to get your help.Cheers!! RRD13 (talk) 13:39, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Greetings, RRD13. I am a GA reviewer as well. I recently passed the Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo article as a GA. To do so, I first left comments at Talk:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo/GA1, so the nominator would know what was good and bad about the article. Then I removed the {{GA nominee}} template from Talk:Jean-Joseph Rabearivelo and replaced it with the {{GA}} template, which you can see in this diff. Finally, I added the article to the list of GAs in this diff.

Can I ask, what is the article you are passing? Can I check on your work and offer feedback? All the best, – Quadell ^(talk) 14:21, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Quadell, it looks like RRD13 passed 2000–01 Arsenal F.C. season. I briefly looked at it, and looks like it qualifies, although I would've asked a few more questions and made a few more requests before passing it, myself. RRD, I'm gonna go ahead and set up a page for us at the Recruitment Centre, because I think you could use some mentoring as per your request; please see your talk page for more information. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 15:48, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

Your involvement with DRN

Hi there, I noticed that you haven't been as active at DRN as you was before. DRN has been a bit backlogged lately and we could use some extra hands. We have updated our volunteer list to a new format, Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard/Volunteers (your name is still there under the old format if you haven't updated it) and are looking into ways to make DRN more effective and more rewarding for volunteers (your input is appreciated!). If you don't have much time to volunteer at the moment, that's fine too, just move your name to the inactive list (you're free to add yourself back to active at any time). Hope to see you again soon :) Steven Zhang (talk) 13:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Format of Sesame Street

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Format of Sesame Street. TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)

Well done Christine! Let me know when you have one of the books at FAC.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:57, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and of course! Let me know about anything you have there, too. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:08, 27 September 2013 (UTC)

Good article recruiter

Hello, can you recruit me? It would be good if you did. Thanks! Philroc (talk) 02:06, 28 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

New section

Looks great! You should probably ask around for some wider input from FA regulars like Brian Boulton, Jim, Tim riley, Cassianto, SchroCat, Crisco etc on a possible merger.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:04, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

I'm looking for a recruiter!

Hello Christine, I was wondering if I could be signed up to be a good article recruit. Thanks! Ug5151 (talk) 14:29, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Ug, I'd better not. I'm busy, and I already have three recruitees. I suggest that you ask someone else. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 20:36, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo's World

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Elmo's World you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- Quadell (talk) 14:50, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo's World

The article Elmo's World you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Elmo's World for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- Quadell (talk) 16:50, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your responses! I've left some replies. Looks like there's just one issue left! (I'd fix it myself, but I don't know where the quote begins.) – Quadell ^(talk) 21:02, 8 October 2013 (UTC)

Tag, you're it! (I left comments back at the GAN.) – Quadell ^(talk) 18:52, 10 October 2013 (UTC)

Opting in to VisualEditor

As you may know, VisualEditor ("Edit ^beta") is currently available on the English Wikipedia only for registered editors who choose to enable it. Since you have made 100 or more edits with VisualEditor this year, I want to make sure that you know that you can enable VisualEditor (if you haven't already done so) by going to your preferences and choosing the item, "MediaWiki:Visualeditor-preference-enable". This will give you the option of using VisualEditor on articles and userpages when you want to, and give you the opportunity to spot changes in the interface and suggest improvements. We value your feedback, whether positive or negative, about using VisualEditor, at Wikipedia:VisualEditor/Feedback. Thank you, Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 18:26, 11 October 2013 (UTC)

Hope you're doing well

	Flowers
	I notice you haven't edited in a few days. I hope that all is fine with you, that your family is doing well, and that life isn't bringing you too much trouble. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 12:29, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Hey Q, how nice of you to ask, and thanks so much for the pretty flowers. No, I've just been busy IRL, and have just finished meeting a deadline. I'm mentoring a few out of the GA Recruitment Centre, so some of that work hasn't been published yet. I'm also in the research phase of Sesame Workshop, which always takes me away from active editing until I complete it. It's my intention, after everyone's in bed and I have a quiet house all to myself, of doing some stuff here tonight. Hope all is well with you as well. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 04:11, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Warm regards

Late night editing is the best. More concentration on the task at hand. Sometimes tea helps! Binksternet (talk) 04:53, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Yum!

Tea's great, but I prefer chocolate milk! ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 05:04, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Elmo's World

The article Elmo's World you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Elmo's World for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- Quadell (talk) 17:32, 13 October 2013 (UTC)

GOCE September 2013 drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors September 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The September 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the October blitz! – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 04:36, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to The Wikipedia Adventure!

Hi! We're so happy you wanted to play to learn, as a friendly and fun way to get into our community and mission. I think these links might be helpful to you as you get started.

• The Wikipedia Adventure Start Page
• The Wikipedia Adventure Lounge
• The Teahouse new editor help space
• Wikipedia Help pages

-- 19:54, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

Mission 1	Mission 2	Mission 3	Mission 4	Mission 5	Mission 6	Mission 7
Say Hello to the World	An Invitation to Earth	Small Changes, Big Impact	The Neutral Point of View	The Veil of Verifiability	The Civility Code	Looking Good Together

Get Help

About The Wikipedia Adventure | Hang out in the Interstellar Lounge

GOCE Blitz wrap-up; join us for the November drive

Guild of Copy Editors October Blitz wrap-up Participation: Out of eleven people who signed up for this blitz, eight copy-edited at least one article. Thanks to all who participated! Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Progress report: During the seven-day blitz, we copy edited 42 articles from WikiProject Film's backlog, reducing it by a net of 34 articles. Hope to see you at the November drive in a few days! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. Sign up for the November drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by EdwardsBot (talk) 17:47, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:01, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Hawkeye7 (submissions)
3. Sasata (submissions)
4. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
5. Casliber (submissions)
6. Adam Cuerden (submissions)
7. Miyagawa (submissions)
8. Piotrus (submissions)
9. Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

• Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
• Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
• Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
• The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
• Finally, the judges are awarding Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 01:03, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup award

In recognition of your participation in the 2013 Wikipedia:WikiCup, in which you reached round 4, the semi-finals. J Milburn (talk · contribs) and The ed17 (talk · contribs) 11:45, 3 November 2013 (UTC)

GA request

Hi Figureskatingfan, I was wondering if you would be willing to recruit me to review good articles, as I want to learn how to review them. Jinkinson talk to me 02:07, 11 November 2013 (UTC)

Yah sure; my last recruitee just graduated, so what the heck. ;) Things are a little busy IRL for me now, so it may take a few days, perhaps into next week, to get it set up. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:49, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Yes, I'm still interested, assuming you have the time to do it and everything. Jinkinson talk to me 21:15, 2 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gerald S. Lesser

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gerald S. Lesser you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Taylor Trescott -- Taylor Trescott (talk) 17:41, 15 November 2013 (UTC)

Reference Errors on 17 November

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Just Give Me a Cool Drink of Water 'fore I Diiie page, your edit caused a broken reference name (help). (Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot (talk) 08:02, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

November 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to List of people with hepatitis C may have broken the syntax by modifying 2 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• {|class="sortable wikitable"
• He had a liver transplant earlier that year, after suffering from hepatitis for many years.<ref>{{cite news | last = Ratliff | first = Ben | title = Outsider Whose Dark, Lyrical Vision Helped

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 20:40, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Can you take on a new recruit?

Hello Ms. Meyer. I'm Jim Crutchfield, also known on Wikipedia as jdcrutch. I've done a lot of editing and even more commenting, but haven't ventured into the realm of Good Articles yet. Would you be willing to teach me how to review articles for GA nominations? J. D. Crutchfield | Talk 21:25, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Would you be my mentor for GA reviews?

Hi. I am interested in learning how to review GA nominees. I visited Recruitment Centre page. The page says 'Available' against your username. Would you please mentor me through the process of GA reviewing? --Seabuckthorn ♥ 22:01, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

Hello! A GAN Backlog Drive will begin in less than 4 days! In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or leave a message on the Backlog Drive talk page. And remember, there are less than 4 days before the drive starts!--EdwardsBot (talk) 03:14, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive

Hello! Just a friendly reminder that the GAN Backlog Drive has begun and will end on December 31, 2013! If you know anyone outside of the WikiProject that may be interested, feel free to invite them to the drive! If you have any questions or want to comment about something regarding the drive, post them here--EdwardsBot (talk) 00:07, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

November 2013 GOCE drive wrap-up

Guild of Copy Editors November 2013 backlog elimination drive wrap-up newsletter The November 2013 drive wrap-up is now ready for review. Sign up for the December blitz! – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:22, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library's Books and Bytes newsletter (#2)

Books & Bytes

Sign up for monthly delivery

Welcome to the second issue of The Wikipedia Library's Books & Bytes newsletter! Read on for updates about what is going on at the intersection of Wikipedia and the library world.

Wikipedia Library highlights: New accounts, new surveys, new positions, new presentations...

Spotlight on people: Another Believer and Wiki Loves Libraries...

Books & Bytes in brief: From Dewey to Diversity conference...

Further reading: Digital library portals around the web...

Read Books & Bytes

The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs) 16:48, 5 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey

As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 14:52, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Which First Song?

I thought "Do the Propeller!" is the new Wiggles generation debut song but we didn't know that in a News video uploaded on YouTube, clips from the actual first taped song "Peanut Butter" with a very low volume are shown. Emma's bow is also different. Take a look at this video taped on May 17 2012 and see if you can guess what's different about the Wiggles' clothing and Emma's bow before the next songs were taped in London.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0e0SdhJpTZQ - We thought Anthony is absent but in another news video from SkyNewsAustralia, he's actually in it 'cause he's peanut butter! Dcelano, 01:37, December 9, 2013 (UTC)

The Wiggles at Disneyland

If only somebody on YouTube has one of the Wiggles' Disneyland live special. That's one of their very first TV performances in 1998. Dcelano, 05:18 December 17, 2013, (UTC)

Dcelano, nice to know but what am I supposed to do about it? Please remember that user talk pages and especially the talk pages of articles aren't the place to discuss trivia about The Wiggles or anything else. I've explained to you over and over about what constitutes reliable sources; YouTube videos are not, even if whoever downloaded it says something like "This is the first time they appeared on TV". I and others have also explained the talk pages aren't WP:FORUM; please read the linked policy page. And please don't come to my talk page with this kind of trivia, as interesting as it is. If you continue, I will revert you, as I and others have done in the past. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 07:17, 17 December 2013 (UTC)

A year and a half later

I'm sorry it's taken me so long to see that you had responded so promptly to my earlier comments. The Dorothy is Dorothy Malone. My first edits were to her article, which at the time was filled with rank, malicious, unsourced gossip. Happy holidays! ForDorothy (talk) 18:39, 20 December 2013 (UTC)

GOCE December 2013 Blitz wrap-up and January Drive invitation

December Notes from the Guild of Copy Editors The December blitz ran from December 8–14. The theme for this blitz was articles tied in some way to religion. Seven editors knocked out 20 articles over the course of the week. Our next blitz will be in February, with a theme to be determined. Feel free to make theme suggestions at the Guild talk page! The January 2014 Backlog elimination drive is a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on January 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on January 31 at 23:59 (UTC). Our goals are to copy edit all articles tagged in October and November 2012 and complete all requests placed before the end of 2013. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits at least one article, and special awards will be given to the top five in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", "Number of articles of over 5,000 words", "Number of articles tagged in October and November 2012", and "Longest article". We hope to see you there! Coordinator election: Voting is open for candidates to serve as GOCE coordinators from 1 January through 30 June 2014. Voting will run until the end of December. For complete information, please have a look at the election page. – Your drive coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978, Jonesey95 and The Utahraptor To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Message delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:25, 23 December 2013 (UTC)

ANI

Hello, it's unfortunate that no admins responded to your recent ANI (as of yet). If you still want to pursue this issue, perhaps you should have a look at some of your options at Wikipedia: Dispute Resolution. Perhaps you could file an WP:RFC/U. Hope this helps. - ^theWOLFchild 06:29, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

I appreciate that someone post-dated the comments at ANI to give us more time. (If it was you, thanks.) I suspect that nothing has happened as of yet because of the holidays. I'm willing to give it a bit more time before moving onto another forum. Happy holidays! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 06:38, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

WikiProject Good articles

I saw earlier posts higher up on your talk page that you had a few recruits currently, but I wanted to ping you to see if you had any time now for one? I'm interested in helping, and there is an obvious major backlog currently. If you are not available, would you terribly mind updating Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Recruitment Centre/List of Recruiters to show that you are not available. Thanks, -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 22:34, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

You can probably see from reading above here on my talk page that I had a few prospects, but none of them have followed through. I figure that with how busy I and most people are, if potential recruits don't respond back to me, they're no longer interested. I don't want to go to the bother of pursuing them, so I tend to drop it. So yah, I'm available to take on a recruit or two, and have updated the list as per your request. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 13:04, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm more than willing to give you as much of my time as I can to help out. I really would like to learn how to review articles, 1) because there is a backlog, and 2) because I want to submit a few articles, but I want to completely understand the process from the outside. Let me know what I need to do, and I will do it. Thanks -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 15:27, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Are you asking that I take you on as a mentee? If so, that's fine. There is a huge backlog at GAC, so there's a need for good reviewers; hence, the reason for the Centre. You're right, reviewing articles is a good way to learn what's expected when you submit your own articles. If you like, we can start the process right away. Just let me know. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 19:37, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Yes, please be my mentor? -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 19:43, 27 December 2013 (UTC)

Tosh Angelos

Feegiurskeitin, I understand that you're trying to be an expert in illiteracy and bad spelling, but, why is the Gillespie source the supreme authority on this issue when a lot of other sources online state the name differently? It's obvious that this is how the authors or mrs. Angelou spelled the name based on how they pronounce it. I don't understand why this "needs to remain" and why you "will continue to revert [...] if [I] continue to change it". Any source provided doesn't need to be connected with the people involved. It is actually even better if it is not connected with them. Why would you be so stubborn on this issue and not try to find out more about it online? Also, I should mention that this article's references do follow quite a weird style.

A simple google search does provide some argument for my edit: https://www.google.com/search?q=anastasios+angelopulos. For example: http://www.princeton.edu/africanamericanstudies/news/archive/index.xml?id=9697. I would call for a third opinion on the matter rather than just adopt a particular source as the supreme authority on an obviously Greek name and then just state that it has to remain so. Heracletus (talk) 07:10, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I referred the matter to User:Future Perfect at Sunrise for a third party opinion. Heracletus (talk) 07:28, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

I'm sorry but saying that I am a "Greek-language expert" and "Thanks for your interest in accuracy and for your advocacy of Greek here in this project." can only be seen as ironic, as I never claimed I was an expert and most of my edits on wikipedia do not concern the Greek language. Furthermore, staunchly stating that " In regards to Maya Angelou, Gillespie (p. 29) spells Angelos' name "Enistasious", and that's what needs to remain, regardless of how inaccurate it may be." and that "I regret to tell you that I will continue to revert you if you continue to change it." sounds to me as quite absurd.

On your second post on my talk page, you wrote: "I've been polite and have stated my position clearly; please extend me the same courtesy.", and I think I have also stated my position clearly: "There are other sources claiming a different spelling, why you just reject them?" You go on to write: "You can bring it to a third party all you want, but what sways me are reasoned arguments." Apart from the third party thing being based on a wikipedia policy as I will explain below, I think I have also given you a reasoned argument:

When I first made the name change I provided a source, which you just claimed was less reliable than your book source and removed it along with reverting my edit. You did not even revert my edit, you just edit out any changes I had made into the way the article was before, cf. https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Maya_Angelou&diff=587710458&oldid=587693326. That was not too nice. The next time I made the change, you reacted by saying it was not supported by the sources and thus removed it. However, I have provided you with at least two sources, one being an academic article by Princeton, holding a different spelling of the name.

You wrote on my talk page: "If you can cite both WP policy and sources that support your position, I'll take it into consideration.", and well, I have stated sources. So, when you write such a thing, it does sound a bit irrational. Now, let me also cite some wikipedia policies:

• WP:3RR (which means that neither of us can revert forever)
• WP:OWN (which means you (or I) do not own the article)
• WP:CONTENTDISPUTE and WP:3 (on third opinion)
• WP:PSTS (on the relation of sources should have or have not with the people involved/concerned in an article)
• WP:RS (on what is a reliable source)

You finally wrote: "According to WP policy, you discuss any change to an article on the talk page first; again, a courtesy I extended to you and something I expect from others.", which just is not true. You don't just discuss any change on the talk page first - this would take forever. Disputed changes may indeed be discussed on talk pages, which any editor can initiate. However, you initiated such a discussion on my personal talk page and not on the article. If you really wanted to discuss the issue, we could do it on the article's talk page which may have drawn more opinions on the discussion, or even have put a dispute tag on the section. (see WP:EDITCONSENSUS, WP:BB and WP:BRD)

Now, on the real subject: It is quite obvious that the man who was Greek or of Greek origin at least was name Anastasios, because this is a Greek name, which makes sense, and because several sources support this. What has happened is that mrs. Angelou, as can be seen in her autobiography, met this guy as Tosh, a name to which she could not relate, and which this man explained as Greek for Thomas - Enistasious. However, any Greek will tell you that the Greek name(s) is Θωμάς - Αναστάσιος (Thomas - Anastasios, with Anastasios quite often pronounced sounding as Enistasious by US English speakers - any Greek American will support this). This is also supported by an interview given by mrs. Angelou: http://books.google.com/books?id=HpHlfg7YxfYC&pg=PA10&lpg=PA10&dq=maya+anastasios+angelou&source=bl&ots=cssHNt8UWx&sig=8W68JEzGq4JjHEZB6bN1YaIyvEI&hl=en&sa=X&ei=f4K-UrrRDqnv0gWvv4DIAQ&ved=0CF4Q6AEwBg#v=onepage&q=anastasios&f=false , where the name is written as stated by her as Anastasios Angeloupolos (which should again be Angelopoulos), and where Tosh is stated as Tash. It's obvious that authors not accustomed to Greek names or the pronunciation of mrs. Angelou keep stating the name differently. This can be seen by a Google search for "Anastasios Angelopulos", which will provide results for the surname form of Angelopulos. It is quite evident that the real Greek name is Anastasios Angelopoulos to everyone who has any experience with Greek names. Heracletus (talk) 16:50, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

First off, I was not being ironic; I was trying to give you credit for your obvious knowledge of Greek and for your involvement in Greek articles, which I respect. I looked at your talk page, which mentions that involvement a lot. You, on the other hand, came to my talk page, misspelled my username, and called me illiterate. Absurd? Really? How is having a clear position absurd? I regret that I didn't bring it to the article's talk page, but this felt like a personal dispute about behavior and not something that substantially affects the article. And threatening to bring in a third party so early into the discussion is so not cool. According to WP:3O: "Before making a request here, be sure that the issue has been thoroughly discussed on the article talk page. 3O is only for assistance in resolving disagreements that have come to a standstill. If no agreement can be reached on the talk page and only two editors are involved, follow the directions below to list the dispute."

Re: WP:3RR; yes, I reverted you twice, the first time explaining that Gillespie was more reliable than the Achievement webpage in the edit summary. Then I reverted you again and came to your talk page to explain, before it got to a third time. If being the only editor in all of WP working on Angelou's articles, including contending with vandalism, means that I think that I own the article, I suppose I'm guilty. You've listed all the policies I've broken, but you haven't cited how. I suppose that it can be argued that Gillespie is a primary source, but it's the best we have at our disposal, so I made the editorial choice to depend upon it here. WP:PSTS states: "Unless restricted by another policy, primary sources that have been reliably published may be used in Wikipedia; but only with care, because it is easy to misuse them.[4] Any interpretation of primary source material requires a reliable secondary source for that interpretation. A primary source may only be used on Wikipedia to make straightforward, descriptive statements of facts that can be verified by any educated person with access to the source but without further, specialized knowledge." I questioned the website's contention about how Angelos' name is spelled, and instead of giving me evidence, you insulted me; see WP:CIV. You also didn't WP:AGF. I can tell you that if you had led with the evidence, this discussion would've gone much differently.

Re: the issue at hand: the Achievement webpage is the only source that spells Angelos' name that way, and Gillespie is the only source that spells it "Enistasious". I looked at my extensive library about Angelou (Bloom, Braxton, Hagen, Lupton), and they all refer to him as "Tosh Angelos". I hear you about the authors' obvious unfamiliarity with Greek names, and you're probably correct, but most of the sources support one spelling. Perhaps the solution is to use the Angelou sources and put a note about what's probably the accurate spelling. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 18:19, 28 December 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me, but why would you choose to reply here, since you have replied the exact previous time on my talk page?

You first commented on my talk page and not the article's page, while there was nothing personal in my edit on the Maya Angelou talk page. And, now, you complain because I asked for a third opinion, which is a part of standard dispute resolution, actually one of the mildest procedures that can be followed.

I intentionally misspelled your username - actually part of it - to try to emphasise my point that Enistasious is just a misspelling of Anastasius/Anastasios. I really really fail to understand why you feel threatened by a third opinion on the issue. The person I notified is an uninvolved administrator who seems to have some knowledge on language issues. You also should feel free to request comments on this issue or list this for a third opinion or follow any other procedure you see fit.

You came to my talk page and stated you will revert me forever, you didn't came there to really discuss this before you had to revert for a third time. But, again, I did not provide you with the 3RR policy to accuse you of anything, i just responded to your calling to provide you with the relevant wikipedia policies. And, yes, phrases like this: "...being the only editor in all of WP working on Angelou's articles, including contending with vandalism..." do seem to indicate that you think you're the one person "working on and protecting" those articles. I did not write that you broke any policy, I just replied to this statement of yours: "If you can cite both WP policy and sources that support your position, I'll take it into consideration.", by citing all the wikipedia policies I thought were relevant.

Also, initially, I made no personal comments on you, I only wrote this "I understand that you're trying to be an expert in illiteracy and bad spelling, but, why is the Gillespie source the supreme authority on this issue when a lot of other sources online state the name differently?" in response to you writing this first: " I understand that you're a Greek-language expert, but we need to keep the spelling to follow the sources." I think that being reverted twice, when the first time I had provided a reference for what I wrote, and you did not just revert it, but just edited out my changes, because you did not like my source, without even notifying me or starting a discussion, and doing nothing much about it does not mean that I assumed bad faith. I assumed bad faith when you landed on my personal talk page to argue the following points:

A. Thank you, Heracletus, that you're a Greek-language expert and have helped with Greek in wikipedia. ("Heracletus, I understand that you're a Greek-language expert...", "Thanks for your interest in accuracy and for your advocacy of Greek here in this project.")

B. We need to follow this perfect source that I love and care about. ("...but we need to keep the spelling to follow the sources. In regards to Maya Angelou, Gillespie (p. 29) spells Angelos' name "Enistasious"...", "Until we can find a more reliable source that has what you state is the correct spelling, and it's connected with the man who married Angelou, it needs to remain.")

C. If you revert against this beloved source of mine, I will revert you each and every time. ("...and that's what needs to remain, regardless of how inaccurate it may be.", "I regret to tell you that I will continue to revert you if you continue to change it.")

Finally, your last point here is completely and utterly incorrect. A search online will provide you with sources supporting either spelling. And, I have already provided you with a link from Angelou's autobiography and from a book with an interview of hers which support each one a different spelling. And, now, you just write that you looked through your library's 5 books on Angelou and you cannot find it there. I'm sorry, but, this point clearly proves why a third party opinion is needed. But, if you feel User:Future Perfect at Sunrise may be biased, you can ask another administrator to look into this, or list this issue in the third opinion's list or start a request for comments. I again state that I did not try to limit you and will accept the abovementioned forms of resolution. Heracletus (talk) 05:34, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

It's pointless to argue with you any further, since you continue to insist being uncivil, disrespectful, and insulting. Bring in any third party you like, as long as we stick to the issue at hand: what spelling we use for Dr. Angelou's first husband. I'm willing to follow the resolution I suggest as well. I suspect that this is a matter of deciding what sources to follow, which is tough when so many of them seem to contradict each other. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 07:03, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Christine, in your previous response you wrote that: "the Achievement webpage is the only source that spells Angelos' name that way" and in this last response, you write: "I suspect that this is a matter of deciding what sources to follow, which is tough when so many of them seem to contradict each other." Can you see that this is a contradiction?

I probably did overreact over your first post on my talk page and I did act uncivil, however, I did not mean to insult you by misspelling your nickname, I only wanted to emphasise my point. I perceived your initial comments as ironic and that is why I reacted like that. Apart from some irony on this issue, I don't think I have been really insulting, i.e. I don't think I really called you any names.

Again, I did not call anyone to investigate on you, take any action against you, or do anything else. I called another person who is an administrator on wikipedia - and who's probably on holiday, or at least has not responded yet - to just provide a third opinion on this. His opinion, of course, will not be final till the end of times, and can be overriden through additional sources, a consensus reached on the talk page or even a more populous discussion. It's just another person's opinion.

My issue with you is that you did not - initially - land on my talk page to discuss, but to announce that you will keep reverting and to comment on my relation to Greek on wikipedia. I stressed this by being what you call uncivil and I'm done with it; I think you got it and it needs no more discussion. Another issue is that you kept failing to notice other sources apart from your library's books on Angelou, but we have also been through that.

I would propose something of this sort: "Enistasious[1][2] (Tosh) Angelos [or Anastasios Angelopoulos [3][4]]", where [1] and so on are references, and to be done with it. However, I cannot really assess which references would fit your criteria of reliability and so on. Heracletus (talk) 23:02, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

You've inspired me to put the note on the top of my talk page about keeping discussion threads together. Other than that, I won't get into an endless debate; to be honest, I have much better things to do. It's obvious you don't know how to analyze sources, so perhaps I can help.

Here are the sources we have:

• 4 Angelou scholars (Bloom, Braxton, Hagen, Lupton): "Tosh Angelos".
• 1 primary source (Gillespie): "Enistasious (Tosh) Angelos".
• Angelou (another primary source) in Singin' and Swingin' : "Enistasious" (or "Tosh)"; she spells his last name "Angelos".
• Princeton University website, [1] written by an undergrad: "Anastasios Angelopulos".
• Compilation of interviews [2]: "Anastasios Angeloupolos" or "Tash".

In the above list, the least reliable sources are the Princeton website (and the dozens of other bios about Angelou) and the interviews, because they probably haven't been checked for accuracy. According to WP:RS, we should also eliminate the primary sources, although I as this article's main editor have chosen to use Gillespie, without objection from reviewers. IMO, the Angelou scholars are the most reliable because they're (quoting from WP policy at WP:RS), "published materials with a reliable publication process"; i.e., they're from reliable publishing houses. (Bloom and Braxton are compilations of articles that previously appeared in peer-reviewed journals.) Consequently, I think that we should use "Tosh Angelos" and explain the differences in-text, as WP policy states, "Material should be attributed in-text where sources disagree". If you disagree, as I state above, you can get the opinion of a third party. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 22:31, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Excuse me, but, you are the one who replied one time on my talk page and then decided to just keep replying here. So, it's not my fault that this was inconsistent.

You state you will not get into a debate and then form an accusation that I do not know "how to analyse sources" and you're here to help me with this. If this will not lead into debate, what will?

Moreover, the sources you analyse - "analyse" being your own term for it - are the few sources we have mentioned, whereas a google search will provide quite some more for either name form. I must note that your 4 scholar sources only comment on the literary work of Angelou, thus of course adopting the name she uses in her autobiographies. Furthermore, you're right on the Princeton one, it's based on other online sources. However, the name is mentioned online quite enough times on the form I suggest. I must also note that it was a usual thing for Greek Americans to shorten their surnames dropping the "-poulos" ending of it. However, I do not know what exactly happened with Angelou's husband's name. I do know that the form I suggest makes sense and is mentioned in sources. Therefore and as you seek to claim that all of them are unreliable, I would like to have a third opinion.

Frankly, a Google search for the name "Enistasious" provides no other results apart from the husband of Angelou. It's a bit difficult to suppose that only one person ever bore this name. It is much easier for me to suppose a lot of sources follow Angelou's spelling in her book. I would also like to note here that there also seems to be confusion over whether her middle name is actually Ann or Annie, and that she seems to be using the honorific "Dr." based on her honourary doctorates...

What is even more interesting is that in her autobiography Angelou seems to have difficulty understanding her future husband's name, asking what kind of name is Tosh, and getting the answer that it stands for what she spells as Thomas - Enistasious... I furthermore fail to understand whether you actually suggest you have a special status as the article's main editor or not.

Finally, I tried to form a conciliatory suggestion based on all sources, but I am open to what you suggest, providing that it reflects both spellings. Could you provide an example of how you suggest it to be written? Heracletus (talk) 05:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Wow. Okay, will give you what you ask. How about this: "In 1951, Angelou married Greek electrician, former sailor, and aspiring musician Tosh Angelos ... We could use any of the four scholar sources (I think we only need one, probably Lupton). Then we could put in a note stating, "In her third autobiography, Singin' and Swingin' and Gettin' Merry Like Christmas, Angelou describes meeting Angelos, and his name is spelled "Enistasious (Tosh) Angelos", explaining that his first name was Greek for "Thomas". (ref page #). In a 1993 interview, Angelou further explained the origin of his name, stating that it was spelled "Anastasios Angeloupolos". (ref) Is that satisfactory to you? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:57, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, I agree. Would you mind formulating this on the article? Heracletus (talk) 04:43, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Poetry of Maya Angelou

Harrias ^talk 12:03, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Impressive work at Poetry of Maya Angelou. Great to see a very interesting article on the Main Page. Happy holidays! ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 18:49, 29 December 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your review...

Replied at Template:Did you know nominations/Aurora Film Corporation. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 17:30, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Replied there. Regards.--Dwaipayan (talk) 21:44, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Sesame Workshop

Chances of DYK promotion is nil right now. I'd recommend GA nomination. --George Ho (talk) 21:45, 30 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!

Hello Figureskatingfan, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)

GA reviewing

Hi Christine, as the only active member on this list interested in helping out people with GA review, is this a reasonable review? Best, Matty.007 12:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Ah, I am such a Doctor Who fan! I just saw this episode recently, as I'm going through the series again. I found that I had underestimated Eccleston the first time around, mostly because I adored Tennant and to a slightly lesser degree, Matt Smith. The 50th anniversary and the Xmas episodes rocked! But please excuse me; I digress. I think you've done a credible job at your first GA review. I'd have done some things differently, like not strike-out the resolved comments, mostly because it's hard for others to read them later. I also use a different template, 'cause I think the table ones are unwieldy, and I use it as an overview, placed before my prose and source reviews, but that's just a matter of choice. I think that you're a good example of the value of an outside reviewer. You had some basic questions that make it obvious you're not knowledgeable about Doctor Who. (What's wrong with you!) ;) But these are questions that nominators should have to answer and deal with, and you came up with some issues that someone close to the topic isn't going to come up with, like when the source was misquoted about Margaret. Nice job, and I hope that you do more reviews in the near future. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:17, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

I also saw the Christmas and 50 one, but I preferred the 50th one. I am planning on unstriking the comments later, but I didn't want to miss any comments. I like DW, and have seen most of the the revived episodes, but am not an avid fan, and don't know much about the WikiProject, which explains a few of my questions. Thanks for the help, Matty.007 14:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Do I have to archive it now? Thanks, Matty.007 16:59, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Go here [3] and follow the instructions. It involves putting a GA template on the article's talk page, updating any Wikiprojects there, and then listing it at WP:GA. Congrats on your first GA review! I liked the anniversary episode better, too, although I have a soft spot for DW Xmas episodes. The Xmas episode made me cry (as they often do), while the anniversary episode made me laugh and excited about Gallifrey. I love how DW makes me feel that the most recent episode I've seen is the best one, until I watch the next one. It doesn't do it all the time, but often enough. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:09, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I was using the instructions, but they say nothing about archiving. I wonder how good Capaldi will be? Time will tell! Best, Matty.007 17:13, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Ha ha, a Time Lord joke, very good. ;) Sorry, I misunderstood. Once you pass it as per the instructions, a bot will come by and archive it. I dunno, but I'm looking forward to seeing him. I think having a more mature Doctor will be a good thing. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 17:16, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

OK, thanks. Matty.007 17:21, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

The topic ban is in place

Greetings, Christine. As you have probably seen, another admin implemented the topic ban that had gained consensus. If the user violates it, let me know and I'll block with increasing length as appropriate. All the best, – Quadell ^(talk) 19:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, Quadell. It should make the lives of those of us who work on these articles much, much easier. Happy New Year! Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:19, 1 January 2014 (UTC)

January 2014

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Hallelujah! The Welcome Table may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "()"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• 0000-0019. Retrieved 03 January 2014</ref> and her dining companions are also among the famous (Oprah Winfrey, [[Jessica Mitford]], [[Rosa Guy]]. She serves what [[M. F. K. Fisher|M.F.K. Fisher]]

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 01:09, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Poetry of Maya Angelou

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Poetry of Maya Angelou you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DarthBotto -- DarthBotto (talk) 05:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Poetry of Maya Angelou

The article Poetry of Maya Angelou you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Poetry of Maya Angelou for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DarthBotto -- DarthBotto (talk) 06:02, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Wow, that was the easiest GAC ever! I'll go and deal with your feedback shortly. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:36, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for January 3

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Hallelujah! The Welcome Table, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Frosting (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:01, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

request for GA reviewer mentorship

Hi Christine - I was wondering if you'd consider mentoring me for GA reviewer status. I currently work on (mostly) dental projects and have about 2000 edits. I also wasn't certain if it's too soon for me to consider being a reviewer but thought I'd give it a shot. Thanks Ian. Ian Furst (talk) 21:25, 3 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2014/Submissions/Figureskatingfan

Hi there- I'm afraid I've had to remove poetry of Maya Angelou- it's clearly a great article, but it seems to be very much last year's article, so ineligible. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 16:42, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

I noticed this too late as well. I'm very sorry. It is a very good article and the reason the GA was so simple was because of that fact precisely. You may not be getting the points, but I wanted you to get my assurances as least. DARTHBOTTO _talk•cont 13:19, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

GOCE 2013 Annual Report

Guild of Copy Editors 2013 Annual Report The GOCE has wrapped up another successful year of operations! Our 2013 Annual Report is now ready for review. – Your project coordinators: Torchiest, Baffle gab1978 and Jonesey95 Sign up for the January drive! To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from our mailing list. Newsletter delivered by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:44, 4 January 2014 (UTC)

The Wiggles' Christmas Video Clips

Nobody cares about the 1996 photo of It's a Christmas Party on the Goodship Feathersword anymore. That's why the Wiggles' very first Christmas video clips weren't shown until 1997 by the time Wiggly, Wiggly Christmas was released on video. You see, the Wiggles and their friends' costumes were updated in the video itself because of the logos on the Wiggles' shirts for the first time as shown on here. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HGWHfMUga18 User_talk:Figureskatingfan, January 5, 2014, 05:08, (UTC)

Talk:Vernon C. Bain Correctional Center/GA1

I have looked at all of your comments, and made a few of my own in response. Whenever you are ready to move forward, I'm ready too. -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 01:50, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

You are a ROCKSTAR! Thank you soooo much for your help! -- ТимофейЛееСуда. 23:26, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

GAN

Hi Christine, would you be willing to review a GA nomination of mine? It is 1644 words. Thanks, Matty.007 19:12, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Be happy to, but it will have to wait a day or two, 'cause I have other stuff I need to take care of first. What's the article? Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:42, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

Herm. I asked someone I know is friendly as I'm not sure ho much work it needs; I have gotten it to where I think the level is, but want to be sure. Thanks, Matty.007 18:11, 8 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 01:11, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Letter to My Daughter

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Letter to My Daughter you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 01:12, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Letter to My Daughter

The article Letter to My Daughter you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Letter to My Daughter for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 14:32, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce

The article Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 22:41, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Letter to My Daughter

The article Letter to My Daughter you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Letter to My Daughter for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 01:12, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce

The article Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Snuffy's Parents Get a Divorce for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 01:22, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Good Article Recruitment

Hi Christine--I'd like to learn how to review Good Article nominations, and I see you're listed as available. If this is still true, please do recruit me.--Lemuellio (talk) 15:30, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Hi, I better not; I already have someone I'm mentoring, and another request that I promised to work with. I suggest that you ask someone else. If you can't find someone in two weeks, please ask me again, since I might have openings at that time. Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 16:47, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

All right--thanks.--Lemuellio (talk) 21:17, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Hallelujah! The Welcome Table

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:03, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2014/Submissions/Figureskatingfan again

I'm sorry, but I've had to remove your two latest GAs, which were quite clearly last year's articles. Again, great articles, but just not eligible for WikiCup points- as a reminder, you need to have completed significant work on the article this year in order for it to be eligible. J Milburn (talk) 18:39, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Darn! Ah well, doesn't hurt to try, eh? ;) Christine (Figureskatingfan) (talk) 21:18, 10 January 2014 (UTC)