User talk:Wolverine X-eye
|
This page has archives. Sections older than 21 days may be automatically archived by ClueBot III. |
Inactivity during reviews
[edit]I've noticed that you've opened two reviews and then abandoned them at Talk:Kawa model/GA1 and Talk:Sleeping Beauty (1959 film)/GA3. If you don't intend to complete a review in a reasonable timeframe, it's courteous to return them, especially if you've begun a second review after you abandoned the first one. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 03:52, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Thebiguglyalien: I didn't abandon the Kawa model review, the nominator, Significa liberdade, did. Regarding the other review, I'll pick it up after I'm done explaining basic algebra to my sister. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 17:18, 16 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wolverine XI: I never received a notification that you had finished your review, and on 22 September, you stated you were going to do a review of the references in the following week. You never followed up on that review. Given this, I did not believe your review was complete. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Significa liberdade: As you know, I began the review as usual, checking over the prose, photos, and citation formats. I planned to conduct a source review the following week, but I saw no sign of you being aware that a GAN had taken place. You did not respond to the GA review or address any of the points I've raised. This deterred me from conducting a source review since I believed your interest was lacking. I waited for a response or an amendment to the article to indicate that you were collaborating, but none of that happened. I then opted to fail the article for your lack of participation. Also, one thing to note is that whether or not the review was completed, the issues that were raised should have been addressed. I believe my actions were just, thank you. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 17:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Wolverine X-eye, I'm coming to this late, but I'm really alarmed that you failed a GA review without even pinging the nominator to check if they saw your review in the first place. If I were the nominator, I too would have waited for the source review you said was coming. Please extend more courtesy to nominators. -- asilvering (talk) 17:25, 28 October 2024 (UTC)
- @Significa liberdade: As you know, I began the review as usual, checking over the prose, photos, and citation formats. I planned to conduct a source review the following week, but I saw no sign of you being aware that a GAN had taken place. You did not respond to the GA review or address any of the points I've raised. This deterred me from conducting a source review since I believed your interest was lacking. I waited for a response or an amendment to the article to indicate that you were collaborating, but none of that happened. I then opted to fail the article for your lack of participation. Also, one thing to note is that whether or not the review was completed, the issues that were raised should have been addressed. I believe my actions were just, thank you. Wolverine XI (talk to me) 17:27, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
- Wolverine XI: I never received a notification that you had finished your review, and on 22 September, you stated you were going to do a review of the references in the following week. You never followed up on that review. Given this, I did not believe your review was complete. Significa liberdade (she/her) (talk) 17:00, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Fishing cat
[edit]The article Fishing cat you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Fishing cat for comments about the article, and Talk:Fishing cat/GA3 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of TheTechnician27 -- TheTechnician27 (talk) 04:45, 17 October 2024 (UTC)
The article Dog you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dog for comments about the article, and Talk:Dog/GA5 for the nomination. Well done! If the article is eligible to appear in the "Did you know" section of the Main Page, you can nominate it within the next seven days. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Rjjiii -- Rjjiii (talk) 21:06, 19 October 2024 (UTC)
 | |
| story · music · places |
|---|
Thank you for improving articles on October! - My story today is a cantata 300 years old, based on a hymn 200 years old when the cantata was composed, based on a psalm some thousand years old, - so said the 2015 DYK hook. I had forgotten the discussion on the talk. --
Requested GOCE copy edit of Brown bear
[edit] | Hello, Wolverine X-eye. This is a courtesy notice that the copy edit you requested for Brown bear at the Guild of Copy Editors requests page is now complete. All feedback welcome! Dhtwiki (talk) 23:57, 19 October 2024 (UTC) |
Page review request
[edit]Hi Wolverine, I hope you are well. Just wanted to ask, when you have time if you could review a page I created called Basics of Sikhi. Jattlife121 (talk) 20:44, 23 October 2024 (UTC)
- No. I'm not interested. Wolverine X-eye (talk to me) 12:46, 24 October 2024 (UTC)
Your thread has been archived
[edit]
|
Hello Wolverine X-eye! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |
Your thread has been archived
[edit]|
|
Hello Wolverine X-eye! The thread you created at the Teahouse, You can still read the archived discussion. If you have follow-up questions, please .
See also the help page about the archival process.
The archival was done by lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by KiranBOT, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing |