User talk:Jreferee/Archive 6

AB Row

Your work to the article is brilliant. I thank you for expanding it so far and added all the references you did. Plus, I must thank you once again for pulling your finger out and contacted Carl Chinn. Whether he does edit the article, we'll have to wait and see, but I certainly do hope he does. Great work, lets just hope the AfD is resolved. - Erebus555 19:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. As of June 2005, the original boundary stone marking the border of Aston and Birmingham was located in the reception area of Gabriels per footnote 1 of the article. Is it possible that you can go there and get a photo of the stone for the article? -- Jreferee 20:40, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sure but I cannot say when I can go due to things I've got going on here. - Erebus555 20:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Helping out with the Unassessed Wikipedia Biographies

Seeing that you are an active member of the WikiBiography Project, I was wondering if you would help lend a hand in helping us clear out the amount of unassessed articles tagged with {{WPBiography}}. Many of them are of stub and start class, but a few are of B or A caliber. Getting a simple assessment rating can help us start moving many of these biographies to a higher quality article. Thank you! --Ozgod 20:54, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Are these unassessed articles listed some place? Thanks. -- Jreferee 21:00, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, they are located here. Most of them are simply of the stub or start class and contain an unfinished WPBIO box. I have personally have been devoting myself to clearing out this list, but if you could assess between 20-30 articles a day it would help greatly. I would love if you could cover 200 a day, but that is asking a lot. Thank you in advance for helping out in whatever way you can. --Ozgod 21:05, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

To assess the article, do I need to fill out the class parameter and the priority parameter or just the class parameter? -- Jreferee 21:33, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry to jump in the middle of a discussion, but you only need to fill in the class parameter. Prioritizing has been halted for now, and the only ones prioritized are those identified as Core biographies. Mocko13 21:37, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest just filling out the class parameter - priority can be determined later. If you can as well, fill out the |living, |needs-infobox= and |needs-photo= as well since have those tagged will help move it along to the class. I would suggest copying and pasting the template I posted here so you can simply copy and paste and quickly fill in the necessary class and other info. Thanks again! --Ozgod 21:38, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I placed more detailed instructions on how to assess biography articles here. -- Jreferee 21:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Brilliant - thank you for doing that! I modified the table so the fields are clear so it is an easier copy/paste, but explained that most fields (with the exception of class and listas) are yes and no responses. If it is more confusing, just do an RV on what I changed. Again, thank you! --Ozgod 22:53, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, you do not put "no" for most of the parameters. Except for the living parameter, you delete the parameter with the answer is no. Please read the instructions I provided, follow them, and let me know whether there is any confusion. Thanks. -- Jreferee 22:59, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Totally fine, I did not know if clearing up the template would make it easier for users to copy and paste and then fill in the answers. --Ozgod 23:16, 23 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

Thank you for dedicating so much time and effort to this - your contributions are invaluable. Here is to hoping we can clean out that enormous backlog by December of this year. --Ozgod 05:39, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Biography awards

Honestly, I'd probably keep it at 1000. Barnstars are meant to be hard to get, and 1000 isn't that hard to obtain really. Then again I just did 100 in an hour because I don't have a life, I may be in theminority in terms of drive. If it gets more people interested you can do it if you want. Oh and how are you not an admin yet? I'll gladly nomiate you if you want to be one (though I'd say et's what until after the assessment drive.--Wizardman 22:43, 24 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll keep it in mind. -- Jreferee 22:42, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment Drive

Thank you for creating this an adding me to Awards committee. I have committed myself for the time to drive through the X through Z alphabet. Random choice, I know, but I feel most people will go from A backwards. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Ozgod (talk • contribs) 01:18, 25 February 2007 (UTC).[reply]

Easy with the Prods

I have Yuri Ruley on my watchlist, and I was shocked that it had been proposed for deletion. He is most certainly notable, and it even says it in the article. I looked at your contributions, and in the midst of all your good, hard work I see a major problem. You are putting {{prod}} on many articles that should not be deleted. Read WP:PROD to see how to properly use them. The first sentence states: Proposed deletion is a process for deleting articles (and, under certain circumstances, user pages) that are uncontroversial deletion candidates but do not meet the criteria for speedy deletion. The ones you have prodded are not "uncontroversial" (meaning nobody would argue to keep it) by any means. A lot of them you have tagged should not be tagged at all, but if you think they don't meet any notability criteria you should put them on AFD. But quite frankly I question your interpretation of WP:NOTABILITY, if you have even read it at all. Sorry for sounding harsh; in reality I'm not mad or trying to belittle you; I just want to see this corrected. See WP:BIO, WP:MUSIC, etc. →Ed Gl 22:16, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The topic for Yuri Ruley has not been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other. The topic fails WP:NOTABILITY. Ruley himself might have fame or importance, but WP:NOTABILITY requires that to be set out in published works. The article also needs to reflect those published works. WP:PROD provides contested examples. The standard "nobody would argue to keep it" does not seem consistent with those examples. Your action of removing the PROD template was enought to contest the prod. Thank you for the note; I'll be more aware of the prod standard for future articles. -- Jreferee 22:38, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that is a good explanation. I'm sorry, but could you show me where "WP:PROD provides contested examples"? I just don't see it. If an article is contested in that way, then it should be dealt with on WP:AFD, correct? →Ed Gl 23:11, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The WP:PROD contested examples: "Articles that have been previously proposed for deletion or undeleted, or discussed on AfD, are clearly contested and are not candidates for {{prod}}." If a prod is contested (as you have with Yuri Ruley), then the next step may be AfD (not another WP:PROD). In otherwords, since the Yuri Ruley article history has a contested PROD in it, the article should not be deleted via PROD even if another PROD is placed on the article. -- Jreferee 23:21, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, now I know what you mean. I was thinking about something else, but my point is that you should check and see if somebody can argue against its deletion before prodding an article. If the answer is no, go ahead and prod it, but if the answer is yes, use AfD. Since Yuri is a member of the band MxPx, an article-worthy subject in itself, you can bet there would be those who have legitimate reasons why the article should be kept. The fact that the AfD result would result in an almost unanimous "keep" is besides the point (haha). You seem like a pretty hardcore deletionist to me =). Bottom line, unless I'm totally mistaken, use AfD unless deletion is a total no-brainer. →Ed Gl 03:19, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikiproject Biography March 2007 Newsletter

The March 2007 issue of the Biography WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Mocko13 22:23, 28 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment Awards

I apologize - I had a blank moment - awarded him his barnstar and cleared his name. I do apologize for upping the final award to 3,000+ but it seemed redundant to have two awards for reaching 1,000, hence why I changed the top to 3,000. Sorry for any confusion I have caused. --Ozgod 00:22, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It might be better to reduce the #2 award to 750 and give barnstars at each 1,000. I figure it will take me four days of hard, focused work to reach 1,000 so 1,000 seems about right for a barnstar. Also, I think it might be more impressive if the awards came from the committee. We also can give awards individually, too. -- Jreferee 00:30, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With my work schedule smoothing out I can refocus on clearing 200 articles a night (my job hours change day to day, so it was a bit nightmarish this past week). I will leave giving out barnstars until the end of the Assessment Drive (also, will be renewing it after March 24th? I will be content if we can get it below 100,000 or ideally 80,000 by March 24th). --Ozgod 00:33, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Expansion of WPBiography banners?

Thank you for your efforts in the current assessment drive for biography articles. I noticed from your edit of Željko Joksimović and from your contributions that you are expanding WPBiography banners from one line to multiple lines. I've found that when editing busy article talk pages, possibly with multiple project banners, that the collapsed form of the WPBiography banner is much better suited. If there is some policy to keep the expanded form, please let me know, but if not, please keep the banner in the collapsed form. Thank you. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 02:28, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comment. However, I am expanding WPBiography banners with additional parameters, not from one line to multiple lines. The Željko Joksimović WPBiography banner lacked three parameters: (i) a&e-work-group, (ii) musician-work-group, and (iii) listas. I expanded the Željko Joksimović WPBiography banner by adding these three parameters to that WPBiography banner. As for keeping the parameters all on the same line, it might make my task more difficult, but I'll give it a try. -- Jreferee 02:41, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, Thank you again for your contributions to the Biography assessment drive. - cgilbert^{(talk|contribs)} 02:56, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I used your suggestion to keep the WPBiography parameters all on the same line and found the tagging just as quick once I got the hang of it. Thanks again for the suggestion. -- Jreferee 20:42, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yves Pouliquen

I am strongly disputing your proposal to delete this article. I am taking the issue to a Wikipedia:Articles for deletion debate for further input. As you will see, I am also questioning several other of your taggings of articles with "proposed deletion". I can't help getting the impression that you have been rushing through some category of biographies of people with names beginning with the letter Y and tagged them without actually taking a close look at the articles. If you make so many obvious mistakes, why wouldn't I assume that you have made some less obvious ones (i.e. proposing the deletion of people who are not members of the French Academy or Pulitzer Prize winners but would still normally be regarded as "notable" for some reason)? Pharamond 08:23, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I had also questioned his taggings (see this above section). Glad it wasn't just me. →Ed Gl 20:27, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Biography Nominations

G'day mate. Sorry to have to put my Admin Hat on so soon, but I'm just wondering what to make of the Prodding you've been doing recently. I can't quite follow what's going on at the moment, but you seem to have put some noses out of joint, so if you have the chance to let me know what's happening, I'd be very grateful. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:08, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congradulations on your Adminship, to which I was happy to provide my support. Recently, I've gone through about 600 biographies as part of the biography assessment drive that I helped put together. For those biographical topics that have not been the subject of multiple, non-trivial published works from sources that are reliable and independent of the subject and of each other, I took a more detaied look. If the article further stood out among those lacking published work references and it seem unlikely that published work references probably were not available, I place a {{prod}} template on some of them, giving the failure to satisfy WP:NOTABILITY as the reason. My hope was to prod those interested in the topic to improve the article to address the concerns given as a reason for the proposed deletion. I've received two responses. The first editor provided some helpful suggestions on using prods and a second editor oddly took the issue to AfD. I've modified my PRODing based on the first editor's helpful suggestions and provided my reasoning to the second editor as part of the AfD. I looked on your talk page, but saw no mention of the recent prodding. Would you be so kind as to tell me how you came across this issue? Thanks. -- Jreferee 16:00, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yusef Komunyakaa

I don't know what you are doing lately when you nominate Pulitzer Prize recipient like Yusef Komunyakaa for notability. You need to do your due diligence and Google a name before your recommend it be deleted. You only make yourself look bad and you piss people off, otherwise. And I've noticed you've put this template on other notable profiles - if this was a mistake, you should go back and fix it - that's a lot of work. --DavidShankBone 22:14, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi David - Thank you for your message. I looked over the Yusef Komunyakaa article and yes, my prod on the Komunyakaa was a mistake. I apologize. Apparently, BigHaz removed the prod about 12 hours before your request, but if I could, I would go back and fix it. Again, I'm sorry. -- Jreferee 02:37, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the knee-jerk tone and thank you for not responding in kind. I've had to waste a lot of time in the past justifying articles which were prima facie notable (even remarkably so, like Floyd Abrams), so it's a bit of a sore spot. When I looked at your contributions, I thought you were recklessly adding delete tags, but that may not have been the case. Regardless, please be careful when adding a tag like that on any page. At least run a quick Google with quotes around the names, please. Thanks for your [productive] work on here. --DavidShankBone 03:09, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately, in addition to mistakenly adding a prod tag to the Yusef Komunyakaa article, I added prod tags in some cases where I probably should have added mergeto tags or left the matter to another editor. I also seem to have unintentionally thrusted myself into a notability = important vs. notability = multiple published sources edit warring debate that has been bubbling for the past few days (unknown to me) and caused Wikipedia:Notability to be protected.[1] Bad tagging + bad timing = baaaaad trouble. I would like to say lesson learned, but I don't think the lessons about prod from others are over yet. -- Jreferee 03:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yudell Luke

I've added reliable references to the article, and removed the prod notice. Thanks for reminding me about it; I'd forgotten I'd created it. :) CloudNine 20:16, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Glad to hear it. -- Jreferee 20:46, 1 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My RfA

Thanks for your support in my recent RfA which passed unanimously - thus proving that you can indeed fool some of the people some of the time. I'm still coming to terms with the new functionality I have, but so far nothing bad has happened. As always, if there's anything you need to let me know, just drop me a line on my Talk page. BigHaz - Schreit mich an 10:32, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

(Sounds a bit weird since I've spoken to you since the end of it, but I hadn't thanked you)

Designing userpages

Hi Mets501 - I saw your offer to design userpages and thought "Thank You!" I've been around Wikipedia for about five months and really need a new userpage. Any help you can offer would be most appreciated. -- Jreferee 05:16, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jreferee: I'd be happy to design your userpage, but it might be a little while. I've already got Reedy Boy's page to do first, and life is very busy these days. —METS501 (talk) 12:03, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Deletion review

An editor has asked for a deletion review of Element td. Since you closed the deletion discussion for this article or speedy-deleted it, you might want to participate in the deletion review. Please note, your actions are being questioned in the deletion review and I though that you may want to know this. -- Jreferee 06:12, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Jreferee. The article in question was voted upon weeks ago (see Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Element TD) and the result was to delete it. It was recreated yesterday by User:Cisz Helion, who is a new user and i don't blame him for recreating it. User:Shenme reported the incident on March 1 before i deleted it. I don't have any problem with recreating it again if people agree. -- FayssalF - ^{Wiki me up ®} 14:29, 2 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

hi

Hi Jreferee - thanks for showing such interest in my script, offering a barnstar, and finally, spreading the word! I am glad it is useful and I expect it to become moreso as suggestions are implemented. I've replied on the script talk page to some points also. –Outriggr § 08:45, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fix biography page

I am not sure what tag should be put for following page http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wanderlei_Silva some one has misedited and has format issues. Could you have a look and fix it may be need a revert ? --Mqmpk 17:53, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mqmpk - I revised the talk page[2]. Does this help? -- Jreferee 03:42, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanx Looks fine now :) --Mqmpk 04:11, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Phenazepam pack.JPG

Thank you for uploading Image:Phenazepam pack.JPG. As a work of the Swiss government, it is inappropriately licensed with {{PD-SwedGov-attribution}}. I have removed that tag and replaced it with {{no license}}. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. --Iamunknown 23:47, 4 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I am unsure why the {{PD-SwedGov-attribution}} is inappropriate for the image. Please explain. Also, the source of the image was/is listed in the Summary. -- Jreferee 03:48, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is inappropriate because Switzerland is not Sweden. Andrew Levine 05:50, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I've been to Sweden and yes, Switzerland is not Sweden. I fixed the licensing and fixed my tagging by sipping more coffee. -- Jreferee 17:04, 6 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

gun

Thanks for getting me started.DGG 02:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bradley Willman on DYK

On 5 March, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Bradley Willman, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

Thank you for your contributions. — ERcheck (talk) 05:07, 5 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]