Jump to content

User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 19

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15←Archive 17Archive 18Archive 19Archive 20Archive 21→Archive 25

Your GA nomination of Greg Skrepenak

The article Greg Skrepenak you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Greg Skrepenak for things needed to be addressed. Kakofonous (talk) 04:33, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello, TonyTheTiger. You have new messages at Kakofonous's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Kakofonous (talk) 19:24, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter

The February 2008 issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is ready! Dr. Cash (talk) 05:16, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Tyrone Wheatley

The Running Man Barnstar
You have done an amazing amount of work on Tyrone Wheatley in a very short amount of time. When I first read the article I thought there was no way it would ever pass FAC, and in just a few days you've just about tamed it into submission. Thank you for your extraordinary effort. Karanacs (talk) 16:37, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Request for Review

Could you take a look at 2007 ACC Championship Game and let me know if there's anything I need to change? It's up for FAC review right now, and any comments or support would be appreciated. Thanks! JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:25, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

I've corrected most of the changes you suggested and have requested an edit from the League of Copy Editors to fix any lingering problems with the article. Does it look okay to you? Thanks. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:58, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
One more time, I think... not sure what you meant with one of your comments. JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:02, 10 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for your support! I'll take a fresh look at Wheatley straightaway. JKBrooks85 (talk) 07:03, 10 February 2008 (UTC)

Nice job getting a picture! I know how tough that can be, particularly when you're dealing with an organization. It's definitely a big help to the article, and I'm glad to see that you're sticking with it. As tenacious as you seem to be, I'm sure that article will be Featured in no time. I can only hope the same for my current featured project, 2008 Orange Bowl. JKBrooks85 (talk) 00:44, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for those suggestions. I believe I've completed them, so if you get a chance, I'd appreciate it if you could swing by and see if it's good to go. Thanks again. JKBrooks85 (talk) 10:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Willis Ward

I will double check my source on that and let you know.Cbl62 (talk) 18:36, 2 February 2008 (UTC)

Tyron Wheatley

I dont know how much trouble you wanted to go to for a picture, but there are a few on flickr (http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=Tyrone+Wheatley). You can probably ask the authors if you can use them too. Jwalte04 (talk) 19:31, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

  • Now I am embarrassed because I am actually not sure how to ask permission. I looked at the profile and was hoping for a email or message system or what have you, but did not see one. Maybe it makes a difference if you have a flickr account of something. Sorry I couldnt be of much help. Jwalte04 (talk) 20:23, 3 February 2008 (UTC)
The best way to contact folks on flickr is through the flickrmail service. When you're logged in, there is a way to send a personal message to a user. If they've got an email address linked to their account, it'll also show up in their email. I've used it to great effect in other Wikipedia articles that needed pictures, and I hope it works for you too. JKBrooks85 (talk) 02:57, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
When you're logged on, there's a small envelope icon to the upper-left of the screen. Click that, then click the "compose mail" link at the middle-left of the new page that opens. JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:21, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Just to the right of your name? If not, then try this link: [1] JKBrooks85 (talk) 21:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I'm sorry that I typed upper-left earlier. My mind was behind my fingers. In any event, for the photo you sent me to... well, crap. I don't see the option either. Try clicking on AAFL Photos' name, then click "profile". Underneath the title, click "send flickrmail"; that should work. Here's a link: [2] JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:14, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
Did that work for you? JKBrooks85 (talk) 05:37, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

A Friendly Notice

Hello Tony. Per your message about the Tyron Wheatley FA candidacy: my "recent editorial involvement" on this page amounted to fixing a two letter mistake causing errors with the migration to the new parser. In no way have I had any actual editorial experience with this page. While I understand that it is often difficult to get adequate comment on a FA candidate, be sure you stay away from excessive cross-posting and double (even triple) check that the editors you are requesting help from have interest in the article. Best regards and good luck with the FAC! --omtay38 20:33, 3 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review of George Hoey

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.Ealdgyth | Talk 16:11, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Picture placement looked fine to me. Ealdgyth | Talk 23:01, 4 February 2008 (UTC)
The first one is more formal looking, I think it works better at the top. If there was a formal current photo, I'd put that in, but I think the formal shot is better at the top.Ealdgyth | Talk 23:10, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:One North LaSalle

I would agree with Dralwik that your phrasing of the section is perfect. I think that by almost all conventional methods, the Chicago Board of Trade Building would be the tallest; architectural elements of any kind, including spires, statues, pyramidal structures, and roofs, are almost always included in overall height. This is even more so since the 1996 ruling of the Council on Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat that spires ("any structures beyond occupiable floors that is architecturally significant in its design and structurally integrated into its height") are included in standard height measurement. However, the owners of One North LaSalle may have attempted to claim that their building was tallest by excluding the architectural elements of other buildings; this was not very uncommon. So, that is likely why some sources are contradictory. I hope this vague explanation has helped in some way; if not, just drop another note on my talk page. There is, however, one thing I am confused about. Looking at this SkyscraperPage diagram of 1930 Chicago (measuring by standard height rankings), wouldn't it be the 7th-tallest and not the 5th-tallest? This, of course, includes the spires of the Palmolive Building and the LaSalle-Wacker Building. Cheers, Rai-me 21:45, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The spire heights listed below the depictions are very accurate. You can also check Emporis, but that will give rounded off (yet still accurate) results. Rai-me 22:24, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

Devin Hester

A user recently suggested moving the kick-off return table into the kick returner article. Since you created the table, we felt it would be only appropriate for you to voice your opinion about his matter on Talk:Devin Hester. --04:48, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review of John Maulbetsch

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth | Talk 17:40, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Harold Washington question

Is there a reason why the image of Mirth and Girth cannot be used in the Washington article? It is discussed in the article, would seem to compliment that discussion as illustrative of both the image and the perceived controversy surrounding it, and is just as free as the image of the statue being used in the Legacy section of the article. Your thoughts, as always are invaluable. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Yes, but perhaps you could illuminate the reasons as to why?- Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:22, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
I am sorry, perhaps you misunderstood my inquiry. I was not asking whether the article is ready for GAC or not; I was inquiring as to the usage of the Mirth and Girth image, which seems to be continually removed as per non-wiki guidelines (people think its "mean" to use it). I think it is encyclopedic - as encyclopedic as using an image of a statue. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 20:52, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
It is also my objective that articles make it to at least GAC as well. Part of that desire is that the article is the best it can be prior to nomination. As the subject of the article has been dead for almost twenty years, BLP doesn't seem to be on point. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:08, 6 February 2008 (UTC)
After the image has been re-added to the article, i plan to nominate it for GAC. Without the image, it is a puff-piece, and has no business being considered for consideration. I think that your analogy of JFK's mistress is not an adequate parallel, as the M&G image is an outgrowth of the subject's political life and the almost mythic representations offered up about the man after his death. The painter noted the existence of the rumor and created an image (a de-mything, if you will), which was subsequently lambasted by the late mayor's supporters and political equals. Inclusion of JFK's mistress doesn't accomplish or fulfill the same task. That the rumor of cross-dressing is being seen as deleterious to Washington's accomplishments by a small and relatively vociferous group of editors in not in keeping with wiki policy of objective neutrality. - Arcayne (cast a spell) 21:37, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: O'Malley GA

Sorry for the delay, I was busy on other stuff for several days and I've been recovering from periodontal surgery for the last two days. It's on my list, I won't forget about it. Wasted Time R (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

OK, I made a few changes myself and then proclaimed it GA. Thanks for your patience. Wasted Time R (talk) 22:07, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

Preity Zinta

Hello! Thanks for the comments on the talk page.

I have though two main concerns with what you wrote:

  • It is almost impossible to convert Rs to dollars and euros in most cases. There are only Rs numbers in crores. From crores, I stuck to millions. Do you think it is a serious problem?
  • Your perception is a bit fast. It takes ages to describe this woman, because she is very different in everything she does. In her roles, she played very unconventional roles, because she was way different from all these girls. Almost all her films portray her in a modern way. It's hard to find her in very colourful films where the heroine has only songs to sing and dance in the rain with white Sarees (that's what she usually says in her interviews; that her friends were laughing that she would become that kind of an actess). Her boyish charm, dimple, vivaciousness is very well known and contributed to her media and screen image, but does it have to be necessarily the reason behind her success and most importantly be mentioned in the lead? It appears in "in the media" section. Because of her non-typical image she took on such diverse roles, as that of the officer, prostitute, single mother, modern independent young woman etc. On the other hand, her courage and honesty expressing herself, whether it is testifying against the underworld or criticising those who try to defame her, is also very well known.
    Now, I did mention her honesty in the lead ( I think the mafia links also have to appear there) but I don't think it is possible to mention her vivaciousness in the lead. It didn't really help to make money. She is highly regarded as a good actress, good performer, but I'm not sure her bubbly image (which she immensely duslikes) contributed to her success as an actor, and I don't think I can find a ref for that.

Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 23:07, 6 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello again Tony (can I call you Tony, or you prefer TonyTheTiger?). Tell me please, is Variety considered to be a western magazine? Shahid • Talk2me 17:43, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Ha LOL! Thanks Tiger. I will try and improve it. I usually spend a lot of time on WP, but you caught me on some tough conditions, so I will have to do it gradually. I have six days left:).
Just a BTW note, according to me, Zinta is extemely sexy. And accorsing to you?
Best regards, Shahid • Talk2me 18:16, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
mmm I didn't understand what you mean. Shahid • Talk2me 18:44, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Oh got it. Agreed. They definitely do. I hope the article also does the same. Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 18:50, 7 February 2008 (UTC)
Hey Tony! Tony, the lead as you edited it didn't summarise the article, but her accomplishements. Comparisons to other actors are not valid; she has her own style. I will add all these reviews in the body texy. My automatic peer review says that the lead is too long. Now there was too much praise. Also, as I said, according to FA reviewers, there shouldn't be a Filmfare Award winner aw award winning describing her. In addition to that, saying that she was in the top grossing films of 2003-4 is a bit odd because it is already mentioned in this very lead wors for word. The article failed back in time because of too much praise. Please see, User:Tony1 accused us of being to peacocky. I can't see why reviews should be added in the lead, while we can add them in the body. I will add them, but please let's not forget that it's an encyclopedia.
There is no even sense in promoting the article to GA if within two months someone takes it to reassessment because of POV (that was the main problem). I will try and add whatever possile this week in the lead and in the body. You are free to fail it. I was using the Jolie article for inspiration and if you see there is no such description in the lead.
See that, "In addition to achieving critical acclaim she has become one of the leading 21st century Bollywood film draws (already mentioned): she appeared in the three highest grossing Bollywood films in 2003 as well as the top grossing Bollywood film of 2004.(already mentioned below in the lead) Although she has not appeared in prominent roles in Cinema of the United States, her performances in Bollywood productions and as a stage performer have been compared to Katie Holmes, Doris Day, Ann Margret, and Julia Roberts by various New York Times critics, and she has been described as a showstealer by a British BBC critic. (I find it completely redundant. Reviews can be added only in the text, and in regard to comparisons, it lowers her status, because she has her own status).
Please show your version to User:Blofeld of STRECTRE) he can explain you what we faced because of such things. Regards, Shahid • Talk2me 05:51, 8 February 2008 (UTC)
So can I write that she is a show stealer in the Armaan paragraph? I will add more western reviews. Shahid • Talk2me 12:01, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

DYK Page View Counts

There's a tool out there that allows you to check page views for articles during Dec. and Jan. I thought it would be interesting to see how effective some of our DYK "hooks" have been to figure out what works and what doesn't. Turns out your Vranos hook was a very good one. Here's what I found:

I don't think that page views could be used as a determiner of notability. What articles are you worried about in terms of possible deletion. I think we're on pretty solid ground on most. Wilcher looked iffy, but survived the deletion debate.Cbl62 (talk) 07:54, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review of Bump Elliott

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.Ealdgyth | Talk 17:06, 7 February 2008 (UTC)

Charlie Fonville

I traded emails today with Charlie Fonville's son. He liked the article on his dad and shared a great story about a stereoscopic photo of his father appearing in his high school physics book. Unfortunately, I suppose it's original research, so probably can't be added to the article. It's nice to now, though, that the stuff we're writing is appreciated by the families of some of these U-M greats. 06:15, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

GA review of Butch Woolfolk

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth | Talk 16:08, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

I did my best to address the GA comments and also did a general copy-edit review. I eliminated a few things to help the flow, mostly things that struck me as extraneous to the Woolfolk article (e.g., listing all the running backs taken in the 1st round of the 1982 draft). If you disagree don't hesitate to put back anything you think should not have been deleted. Also, I don't know the what and why of "n dashes" and so you may want to go through and fix that as needed.Cbl62 (talk) 07:04, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Peer review on List of National Historic Landmarks in New York

Your input is invited. I've gone ahead and asked for peer review on the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York list, including the List of National Historic Landmarks in New York City (hopefully to be considered by the peer reviewers as well). Open at Wikipedia:Peer review#List of National Historic Landmarks in New York. doncram (talk) 23:23, 8 February 2008 (UTC)

College Football Good Articles

With Elliott getting approved, it appears that out of the 45 college football Good Articles, either you or I (or both) were responsible for 19 of them. Pretty good. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:GA-Class_college_football_articles Cbl62 (talk) 00:32, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Wheatley

There are some decent profiles of Wheatley on the news database I have access to but don't want to decide for you what would be worth adding to your article. If you want to post your email to me, I could send you pdfs of some of the articles. Let me know if that works for you.Cbl62 (talk) 20:29, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

Might try PGPirate to see if he'd be willing to offer support on your FAC. Also wanted to let you know that I've got another up right now -- 2008 Orange Bowl -- and I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at it. JKBrooks85 (talk) 23:38, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Medal and Woolfolk

Thanks for the DYK medal. It's been fun. I did notice the Woolfolk hold and will try to address those issues by tomorrow, if not tonight.Cbl62 (talk) 05:29, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

GA pass for Héctor López

Thank you for your hard work on Héctor López. Following an excellent copyedit on the suggestions provided, I have now passed this article as a Good article, and updated the various talk page templates to reflect this.

That also means you get (another)one of these:

This user helped promote Héctor López to good article status.


which you may like to place on your user page (or somewhere suitable) by copy/pasting {{User Good Article|Héctor López}} into the page code.

Great job - well done! EyeSereneTALK 10:55, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Héctor López good article promotion

Hey Tony. I see that Héctor López was promoted to good article status rather recently. Although it was six months ago when we began working on the article, you and I worked together on developing that article for a DYK and to eventually the GA that it became/currently is. Looking at the history, I see that there were a couple dates that you spent a fair amount of time working on the article (December 14, 2007, when I wasn't very active).

Is there any certain criteria that a person must meet to "get credit" for contributing to a good article? Ksy92003(talk) 21:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much. I really feel so glad to have contributed to my first good article. My only wish is that I could've contributed to the article during the Peer Review/Good Article assessment, but I wasn't able to do true "research" contributing at the time. Thanks again. Ksy92003(talk) 21:39, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

re:WP:LOTD

Wow, that is quite a thing to do for an editor. Congrats! I add Godsmack discography to it. Thanks by the way. —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 22:16, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Where do I place my vote? Can I vote for my own? I have another FL coming pretty soon also (Alice in Chains discography). So, is ther going to be a Featured list of the day section on the mainpage? —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 21:56, 17 February 2008 (UTC)
I am, I still don't know how. —Burningclean [Speak the truth!] 02:23, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:100 Cans.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:100 Cans.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 04:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

kick return table

Hey uh, I think you got some of the stats wrong on the table. RC-0722 communicator/kills 17:15, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Well, as I recall, Dante Hall was the only NFL player to reach 10,000 kick return yards. Also, you have travis williams down as having 25 career kick return touchdowns. That just doesn't sound right. RC-0722 communicator/kills 18:56, 12 February 2008 (UTC)
Thanks. BTW, you might want to fix the one on the devin hester article. RC-0722 communicator/kills 20:36, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

My username

My username was renamed on 5 December 2007, so you have already avoided me on your spamming. There is an easy way to avoid it; stop spamming. I had it changed because it is easier to type and is what I wanted originally. It is not really a secretive name change, the two names do have their similarities... Woody (talk) 17:40, 12 February 2008 (UTC)

Talk:Preity Zinta

Please see my comment on the talk page. I disagree with your review for the simple fact that I'm not forced to add any other reviews from Western critics, and it is not supported by any GIAFA criterion. And if you see with some more observation, in the NYT site, there are no other reviews describing her film performances at all. There is only one review describing her performance in the film Salaam Namaste (which is on the article), and nothing else. Shahid • Talk2me 17:17, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi again! I talked to John, and he said that multiple refs were not prohibited. The case is that all the sources are cited to backup the same claim, so I collected them into one footnote. In fact, it is better to see [1] than [1][2][3]. Could you please tell me what the problem with having multiple refs is? Thanks, Shahid • Talk2me 18:50, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I mean, is it a serious concern and must be addressed? Shahid • Talk2me 20:51, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
My question is: multiple references (like ref no 7), are they prohibited? Shahid • Talk2me 20:58, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
OK. If I address the points (except for the NYT reviews, cause there are no other film reviews), are you allowed to change your own decision, without me taking it to another GAC? (just a general question) Shahid • Talk2me 21:46, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
I can't invent "well respected western reviews". This requirement of yours is not supported by any WIAGA criterion, and is merely your personal view. All the refs are reliable (newspapers, leading websites), reviews are representative and represent the majority view, there is one NYT review (the only I could find) and two Variety reviews; everything is well measured, well balanced and well sourced. As said one editor, we are not here to please Westerners (nor Easterners etc.), and if I added now an Indian review to Jolie's article, editors would remove it instantly. I can't see the point. She is an actor (BTW, not an American one), and we are here to present representative comments by critics, from well respected newspapers, regardless of what country they are published in. The Times of India, The Hindu, The Tribune, Rediff all of them are reliable and well respected, as you say. Just for the future, please don't underrate them.
Nevertheless, best regards, Shahid • Talk2me 22:08, 13 February 2008 (UTC)
"well-rounded perspective."
A) You're coming to your own conclusions. It doesn't support your claim at all. And who said that "well-rounded perspective" is Western reviews/views/opinions (or Western sources, or anything Western etc.)? Where is it written? Why do you think that The Times of India is less respected than NYT?
B) It doesn't state or mention any particular country. It implies the simple fact that everything should be neutral and represent the majority view. And it does.
C) Again, (I repeat over and over again) there are no other reviews at all.
Don't bother to write a reply. Shahid • Talk2me 22:37, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Campbell's Tomato Juice Box. 1964. Synthetic polymer paint and silkscreen ink on wood.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Campbell's Tomato Juice Box. 1964. Synthetic polymer paint and silkscreen ink on wood.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:02, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Big Torn Campbell’s Soup Can (Pepper Pot), 1962.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Big Torn Campbell’s Soup Can (Pepper Pot), 1962.jpg. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 19:09, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Apology for blanking

I can assure you this was accidental. Twinkle does the work for me. You have my humblest apologies a thousand times. Thanks, George D. Watson (Dendodge).TalkHelp and assistance 21:44, 15 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: WP:LOTD

Do I discuss lists or (!)vote for them? Regards, Rudget. 14:55, 16 February 2008 (UTC)

Bump Elliott

Thanks--Kumioko (talk) 02:07, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Oh wow

The Original Barnstar
Amazing editing. Simply amazing. Especially since a lot of it has to do with the Michigan Wolverines. GO BLUE Malinaccier (talk) 02:30, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Table sorting

Help:Sorting explains it all. It took a while for the developers and wiki folk to get all the features working. Initially, sorting was all-or-nothing and not very clever. Now, the applications for it are much wider. Hope that helps. Colin°Talk 08:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Harold Innis

Thanks for your response to the Harold Innis entry. Innis received his PhD from the University of Chicago in August 1920. I've added this information to the Harold Innis article.Bwark (talk) 13:02, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Michelle Obama

Thanks- but to tell you the truth, I think the granting of GA status may have been a bit premature, as the article is not really all that well developed yet, in my opinion. I don't agree with the person who complained that it was biased, but I think it's a stretch to say it's on the level of most other GA articles. However, I'm not formally objecting - rather will see what I can do to encourage its expansion and development. Tvoz |talk 18:11, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

Just to be clear - I don't agree with Aznusmcmarine's plan to de-list - I just would have waited a bit before giving it GA. And I think there already have been some improvements. Tvoz |talk 01:59, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Tyrone Wheatley

Thank you for the kind words. I will look over the article and give my opinion. If you have anytime, I am going to WP:FAC 2007 Hawai'i Bowl, East Carolina Pirates football seasons, and East Carolina University. If you could look over the articles and give advice, I would be most appreciated. PGPirate 03:46, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Michelle Obama GA

Thanks for the userbox. - PoliticalJunkie (talk) 16:04, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Ronald Fedkiw

Updated DYK query On 18 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ronald Fedkiw, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 17:30, 18 February 2008 (UTC)


Fair use rationale for Image:Lena.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Lena.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is not a suitable explanation or rationale as to why each specific use in Wikipedia constitutes fair use. Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 20:24, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:IMG 0833 New Orleans.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:IMG 0830 New Orleans.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 01:37, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Image Copyright problem
Image Copyright problem

Thank you for uploading Image:IMG 0829 New Orleans.JPG. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. 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. Ricky81682 (talk) 01:38, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

TfD nomination of Template:The Apprentice (US) contestants

Template:The Apprentice (US) contestants has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. — Jappalang (talk) 01:56, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Quiana Grant

Updated DYK query On 19 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Quiana Grant, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 12:06, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Tyrone Wheatley replies

And the ball is in your court. Just a heads up, I'll be gone most of the rest of the week. Intermittant internet, so I can keep an eye on the TW stuff, but that's why I cut back on the GA reviews. Should be back to normal number next week! Ealdgyth | Talk 02:45, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Melissa Haro

Updated DYK query On 20 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Melissa Haro, 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.

--BorgQueen (talk) 06:22, 20 February 2008 (UTC)

Hector Lopez photo?

Not likely. Hector the ballplayer is in his high 70s. Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 00:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Here's his picture from when he was playing with the Yankees 42 years ago. See if you think it's the same guy. [3] Baseball Bugs What's up, Doc? 05:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)

Washington Park Race Track

I'm on the road this weekend, will be back home Tuesday when I'll try to help. Ealdgyth | Talk 16:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

An article which you started, or significantly expanded, Joanne Gair, was selected for DYK!

Updated DYK query On February 23, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joanne Gair, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Thanks for your contributions! Nishkid64 (talk) 01:10, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

LOTD schedule for March

Thanks for your efforts to elevate the profile of high-quality list articles. I have only one suggestion regarding specific dates to feature the various lists that I nominated. Since Thomas Cranmer, perhaps the most famous historical Archbishop of Canterbury, was executed on March 21, 1556, I suggest that List of archbishops of Canterbury should be featured on March 21. --Orlady (talk) 02:04, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: ISS spacewalks

No preference for the date for List of ISS spacewalks... it's up to you. -- Phoenix2 05:27, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

dyknow again Tony

Updated DYK query On 23 February, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article More Demi Moore , 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.

--Victuallers (talk) 14:29, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Invite

Please accept this invite to join the Cavaliers WikiProject, a WikiProject dedicated to improving all articles associated with the Cleveland Cavaliers. Simply click here to accept!

RC-0722 communicator/kills 20:05, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

Bob Timberlake

I put Bob Timberlake on hold; you can see my comments here. Cheers, Kakofonous (talk) 21:26, 23 February 2008 (UTC)

LOTM

Thank you. I'm honored. I'd pick March 4th and March 21st.

It turns out that we are now trying to figure out if our latest addition to the list is correct. I hope to have it settled soon. Thanks again. -- ☑ SamuelWantman 07:57, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

No problem. I'm in San Francisco, so the entire evening of the 21st is on the 22nd (UTC) anyway. --☑ SamuelWantman 00:50, 27 February 2008 (UTC)

RFA Yet?

Don't know if it has happend for you yet, but I just wanted to say that you are more than qualified for adminship and you would have my support vote for sure. I don't edit anymore but I still review articles for personal use which landed me upon a FA you help to featured status and just wanted to say thanks for your tireless contributions. Oh, I almost forgot... happy birthday. --Television rules the nation (talk)[fka I already forgot (shhhh)] —Preceding comment was added at 08:49, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

On Deja Vu

I think Tony is busy. Could you help me on "Déjà Vu". Its currently on FAC but I met a lot of problems here and there. I passed it immaturely. Thanks heaps. --Efe (talk) 09:25, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Hey. This one also Wikipedia:Peer review/Irreplaceable/archive1 (if you're not busy). Thanks a lot. --Efe (talk) 07:19, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Moore photo

Hi. I responded on the Moore photo here; I don't know if you noticed this response. -- Hoary (talk) 15:42, 26 February 2008 (UTC)


Your GA nomination of Joanne Gair

The article Joanne Gair you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Joanne Gair for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Juliancolton The storm still blows... 18:57, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Re: Counter oddity

Hi Tony! Not sure if you'll see that I replied on the help desk. In short, it was a bug I hadn't noticed until I saw your post. Thanks! henrik•talk 20:01, 28 February 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of countries without armed forces

Military of Switzerland. Gary King (talk) 03:24, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Thom Darden

Congratulations on the Boles article. I think we have til today to respond on Timberlake. I think it's in pretty good shape, and I did eliminate some of the quotes per reviewer comments, but I think the bulk of the quotes are helpful/appropriate. I've been very busy in real life this week and have not had much time for wikipedia, so if you could take a look at Timberlake that would be great. As for Darden, he's been on my "to do" list for a while. And there is a lot of material on him, particularly concerning accusations of dirty play while in the NFL. I'd be happy to help with Darden when I free up.Cbl62 (talk) 15:13, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Articles on U.S. cities

Hi, Tony, I noticed your comment at GAR about WP:Chicago's search for city articles to use as benchmarks as you seek to regain GA status. I'd recommend examining Boston, Detroit and New York City. While they are FA-class rather than GA, they are still worthwhile to use as benchmarks. Cheers, Majoreditor (talk) 18:46, 29 February 2008 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive_19&oldid=1190114541"