User talk:Tomcat7/2013/May

Dostoyevsky navboxes of his works

I see you are cleaning up Dostoyevsky for a GAC run. I think you might have thrown out the baby with the bathwater. These are his own works. Why don't you think they belong on his page. Can you meet me at the talk page. Or at WP:Novels.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:31, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Actually, lets meet at WP:Novels. I'll put something up within the next five hours.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

James Henry Carpenter

Hello,

I really need another good editor to look at James Henry Carpenter. My goal is to get the POV tag removed. Any help you can provide would be appreciated. Jrcrin001 (talk) 16:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions on the article talk page. I toyed with the idea of elimination the intro section, but revamped it with a direct quote. I think it is better now, but would be willing to move that info deeper within the article.

My primary cites are number 5 then 1 & 6 regarding JHC and Carpenter Steel. Secondary sources for the same are 2, 10, 15, 16, 17 & 20.

Any further input would be helpful. Jrcrin001 (talk) 22:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Further work done and the Intro section removed. Any other suggestions? I always appreciate the feedback. Jrcrin001 (talk) 17:53, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

Template:Infobox KHL team

I think this type of template is better than previous, because not KHL teams can not use it.

WikiCup 2013 April newsletter

We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Sven Manguard (submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Cwmhiraeth (submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place Casliber (submissions) and second place Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.

The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.

A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. 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. 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) 16:27, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

FLC review request

Hey Tomcat7! Long time no hear. I've left a couple of comments on your active FLC nom. Could I trouble you to help review my current FLC, please? Cheers! —Bloom6132 (talk) 14:05, 10 May 2013 (UTC)

Article request

Your requested article is ready. In the future, please frequently check the page to see if the request has been fulfilled. OhanaUnited^{Talk page} 04:35, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Unexplained reversion

Hi Tom, you reverted this referenced edit to Brodsky without giving an edit summary. What reason did you have for reverting? I don't disagree that it doesn't belong but we should always give a summary when undoing work that is not vandalism, as this is clearly not. I look forward to hearing your rationale. Thanks Span (talk) 20:08, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Please take your points to the article talk page and don't get into an edit war over this. The editor has added this material before, some months ago, and has put their argument on the talk page. S/he has given university references for the text. There is is RS support [1] [2] support for the view that Brodsky demonstrates strong anti-Ukraine sentiment, though the poem was not published, as I understand, before his death. Span (talk) 20:21, 12 May 2013 (UTC)

Wilhelm Busch

Thanks for your comment on my talk page. I've done a tidy and added book authors' names. It needs a source added for the 'Pietzcker', 'Ueding' and 'Mihr' cites. If we can clarify the stuff that is still outstanding and make sure everything is cited we could send it for a peer review with an eye to present it for GA status. Acabashi (talk) 12:56, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Wilhelm Busch

I've added a Volker Ullrich article for the ref. Acabashi (talk) 13:40, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Citations required

Those are unsupported facts on a WP:BLP that are not well known and are required to be sourced. At least one of the flagged statements talked about her emotional state, which is highly problematic. To avoid this problem, I would be happy to remove all the unsourced statements. --LauraHale (talk) 10:55, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Request for review

Hi there Tomcat! I'm here to request you a favor, a big one. Would you please review my Good Article nominee José María Caro Martínez, it's a kinda short article, I would be really thankful if you review it, thanks in advance! Regards, Lester Foster (talk | talk) 16:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

Fyodor Dostoyevsky templates

Did you ignore Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Novels#Derivative_works_and_cultural_references_templates? I see that 2 people supported your arguments (Deor and Truthkeeper88) and 4 people supported mine (Sadads, GimliDotNet, Edokter and Kuralyov). In addition Drmies is somewhere in between, saying it depends on the specific page. What was you basis for removing after the discussion?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:09, 24 May 2013 (UTC)

No, I didn't. Perhaps you do? My rationale was logical and I won't repeat what I said. This is not a good consensus; a few users answered on a wikiproject talk page, instead on a talk page of a policy or guideline. On a quick read, WP:NAVBOX explains: "Navigation templates, or navboxes, are boxes containing links to a group of related articles." None of them are related to Fyodor Dostoyevsky. Thanks.--Tomcat (7) 09:31, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

Where do you think we should go to get broader consensus?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 12:55, 26 May 2013 (UTC)

He took it to WP:AN

Hi Tomcat7. TonyTheTiger took the templates issue to WP:AN#Is User:Tomcat7 overstepping yesterday, but appears not to have informed you. You may want to take a look. --Stfg (talk) 15:19, 27 May 2013 (UTC)