User talk:ChrisGualtieri/Archive 20
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:ChrisGualtieri. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
| Archive 15 | ← | Archive 18 | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | → | Archive 25 |
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:34, 16 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Foster-Payne House
The article Foster-Payne House you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Foster-Payne House for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 00:01, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Fuller Houses
The article Fuller Houses you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Fuller Houses for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will (talk) 20:41, 17 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Art's Auto
The article Art's Auto you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Art's Auto for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 03:21, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Editor's Barnstar |
| Thank you so much for approving my Questia account. In good timing as well: Just got cracking on a rewrite of the Kurt Vonnegut article. Cheers, ceradon (talk • contribs) 05:46, 18 February 2015 (UTC) |
Your GA nomination of The Mad Hermit
The article The Mad Hermit 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Mad Hermit for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 12:01, 18 February 2015 (UTC)
You've got mail!
Message added 06:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC). It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.
Newyorkadam (talk) 06:17, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Pig Bride 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 Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 02:20, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
The article Pig Bride 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Pig Bride for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 02:40, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
The article Pig Bride you nominated as a good article has failed 
; see Talk:Pig Bride for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 03:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
- It actually passed, but I do not know why Legobot gets confused on an old failure case. Anyways - thanks for the review Wizardman. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 03:49, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business 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 Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 04:41, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A 29-Cent Robbery
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A 29-Cent Robbery 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 Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 10:01, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A Fresh Start
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article A Fresh Start 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 Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 10:21, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A 29-Cent Robbery
The article A 29-Cent Robbery 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:A 29-Cent Robbery for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 10:21, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Please explain...
....what you meant about your comment on AN - That Daily Mail bit is in more than one way a very clear observation about yourself and other editors. Thx. Atsme☯Consult 22:14, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
You can tell everything you need to know about an editor's understanding of Wikipedia's sourcing guidelines by their approach to the Daily Mail.
Should be pretty apparent given the track record of the Daily Mail... So many BLP issues - its like the Daily Kos on silly-season. The Telegraph also routinely screws up majorly, but newspapers in general are horribly inaccurate about "the finer points" in general... ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:15, 21 February 2015 (UTC)- There are no truly good sources when the topic is "celebrity gossip" period, The DM is good for sports stats, local news, and a lot of other stuff - but not for "XXX was seen drunk" reports at all (neither is the Guardian for that). And headlines from newspapers are about the most misused "source" one can find IMO. Collect (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
Chris, I wanted to know what you meant about it being "in more than one way a very clear observation about yourself and other editors". How is it a clear observation about me? Atsme☯Consult 01:56, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstand - yourself as the personal you. Not as in an accusatory you. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:09, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
query
Any chance of ever finding an admin who actually knows and respects the reasoning behind WP:BLP? I seem to have found ne who does not appear to know that omitting part of a claim supported by a source is pretty much the same level of concern as making a wrong claim from that source. Cheers and sorry for the vent <g> Collect (talk) 22:22, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
- The older admins tend to know the difference.... I'd like to think I'm wiser than the common editor, but given the issue of BLP and the use of Mother Jones/Daily Kos/Huffington Post - most editors are unaware that common media are rarely accurate or in context for anything besides basic and general statements. Too many BLP articles are filled with verifiable garbage because it merely exists. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:27, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Alas - some of the "older admins" still think of Wikipedia as the Wild West of Words ... and can be opposed to the newfangled stronger BLP policies. Thanks. Collect (talk) 07:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Witch hunts, polarization, advocacy - ooops, almost tripped over my spurs walking into the saloon. You would think Cpt. Bob would have assisted me onto the porch, but he won't put his wooden friend down.
Atsme☯Consult 17:03, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- All reasons why I prefer to do silent films, NRHP and other topics that are not dominated by teens or political warriors. The amount of time I wasted was enough that I could have done a hundred more Good Articles or a hundred thousand gnome edits. I like to contribute and add to Wikipedia, but some parts of it are just toxic poison. Notability being one of the defining source of conflict for lessor editors - as the purposes of notability are more as a measuring stick of "can you make it article without OR" instead of "is this worthy of inclusion". The maturation of Wikipedia will ultimately be based on whether or not its editors come to embrace the reason behind policies instead of the policies themselves. All policies are subject to change, evolve and be removed. I know few people care about films from a century ago, but some of my work on Wikipedia beats the hell out of other books. And that's good enough for me. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:12, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
- Witch hunts, polarization, advocacy - ooops, almost tripped over my spurs walking into the saloon. You would think Cpt. Bob would have assisted me onto the porch, but he won't put his wooden friend down.
- Alas - some of the "older admins" still think of Wikipedia as the Wild West of Words ... and can be opposed to the newfangled stronger BLP policies. Thanks. Collect (talk) 07:18, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Playwright's Love
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Playwright's Love 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 DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 20:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Mermaid (1910 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Mermaid (1910 film) 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 DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 20:41, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Collyer Monument
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Collyer Monument 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:40, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Playwright's Love
The article The Playwright's Love 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Playwright's Love for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 23:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Mermaid (1910 film)
The article The Mermaid (1910 film) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Mermaid (1910 film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 23:01, 22 February 2015 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 9, 2015)
 Trailer Trash is a US derogatory term for poor people living in trailers or caravans. It appears that these trailer trash happen to live on a trailer park.
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Ice cream parlour • Stadium Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:55, 23 February 2015 (UTC) • |
|---|
Your GA nomination of Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business
The article Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 02:21, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 15:30, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Collyer Monument
The article Collyer Monument 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Collyer Monument for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 17:20, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A Fresh Start
The article A Fresh Start 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:A Fresh Start for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 19:41, 23 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Playwright's Love
The article The Playwright's Love you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Playwright's Love for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 08:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Mermaid (1910 film)
The article The Mermaid (1910 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Mermaid (1910 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 08:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A 29-Cent Robbery
The article A 29-Cent Robbery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A 29-Cent Robbery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 09:21, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Mad Hermit
The article The Mad Hermit you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Mad Hermit for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of A Fresh Start
The article A Fresh Start you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:A Fresh Start for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 09:41, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi Chris
Many thanks for your thorough review of this article. I am sorry that I have been slow to reply to it, but my response is now at Talk:James Balfour (died 1845)/GA2#GA_Review. AFAICS, I have accepted all but one of your suggested changes. --BrownHairedGirl (talk) • (contribs) 13:42, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Collyer Monument
The article Collyer Monument you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Collyer Monument for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 20:01, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Liberty Arming the Patriot
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Liberty Arming the Patriot 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 Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 20:40, 24 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business
The article Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gone to Coney Island and Booming Business for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman (talk) 00:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Her Battle for Existence
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Her Battle for Existence 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 Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 09:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Cupid at the Circus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Cupid at the Circus 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 Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 10:01, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island)
The article Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 13:00, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island)
The article Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Division Street Bridge (Rhode Island) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:41, 25 February 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for February 27
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Pocahontas (1910 film), you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Conservatory and George Barnes. 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) 09:14, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
You appear to have assumed a position without basing your reasons in policy....
The links I provided to updated research is not synth, and it is not disputed by higher tier evidence because the higher tier evidence is OR that is 30+ years old as indicated by the sources cited in the lead. It can't possibly dispute new research. The sources I included are updates in published, peer reviewed journals including PLONE, and the Journal of Cancer Research and Therapeutics. The Cancer journal research clearly states in its conclusion There has been done a lot of work in the analysis of amygdalin, the analysis and detection methods of amygdalin were more perfect and mature; and a large number of studies have shown that amygdalin plays a supporting role in the treatment of cancer, diabetes, atherosclerosis, immune suppression, leprosy and other diseases. This paper reviews recent progression of amygdalin in cancer research.? [1] I also included other research that substantiates what is written in that report. Providing multiple scientific papers (all of which have drawn the same conclusions about amygdalin) is not any different from the Cochran compilation of old OR that was used to source the material in the lead. I am not going to argue this topic any longer because I know exactly what is happening as a result of WP:ADVOCACY. I will simply initiate an RfC. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 14:42, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- I have no history in that article or in that topic, but it is quite clear that the content does not meet MEDRS and your snapping back on me shows you are frustrated and that you do not understand the issue. Your advocacy argument is nonsense because you imply that anyone who disagrees has an agenda. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:59, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Not at all snappy - just curious. I felt my post was within reason, and saw no reason to not ask you why you believed the links do not meet WP:MEDRS. I realize you have no history in either the article or topic which is why I was hoping you would at least provide an explanation for why you responded as you did. You don't have to be accusatory by referring to my response as "snapping back". Calling my argument nonsense wasn't very polite, either. If you don't want to answer my question, we can just drop it and I'll move on. If you'd like to explain the reason for your comments then please do so without being accusatory. Which resources did you feel were noncompliant with MEDRS? Was it The Journal of Cancer Research, or The World Journal of Gastroenterology, or PLoS One? All are reputable review articles in scientific journals that publish peer reviewed research in compliance with WP:MEDSCI: Scientific journals are the best place to find both primary source articles about experiments, including medical studies, and secondary sources. Every rigorous scientific journal is peer reviewed. I think it would be a nice gesture on your part to explain why you thought they were not compliant. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 21:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
You appear to have assumed a position without basing your reasons in policy....
is not the best tone to take on my talk page and you proceed to try and lecture me. It was clearly stated as to why your position flew in the face of established and independently conducted research so I do not need to reiterate what Guy has said. I said I was standing with Guy on the matter and gave a reason. Next time you baselessly accuse and attack editors I will take you to Arbitration Enforcement. We clear? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 22:22, 27 February 2015 (UTC)- Whoa!! Let me reiterate - I wasn't being snappy, and your attitude here is uncalled for considering I simply asked you to explain your comment at the TP. If you think you have a case against me at AE, then be my guest, but stop the threats, please. I will not post on your TP again, and I expect the same from you. Our interaction ends here and now. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 23:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Fine. I am not sure why you would use that source at all. It does not meet MEDRS. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:52, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Whoa!! Let me reiterate - I wasn't being snappy, and your attitude here is uncalled for considering I simply asked you to explain your comment at the TP. If you think you have a case against me at AE, then be my guest, but stop the threats, please. I will not post on your TP again, and I expect the same from you. Our interaction ends here and now. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 23:32, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Not at all snappy - just curious. I felt my post was within reason, and saw no reason to not ask you why you believed the links do not meet WP:MEDRS. I realize you have no history in either the article or topic which is why I was hoping you would at least provide an explanation for why you responded as you did. You don't have to be accusatory by referring to my response as "snapping back". Calling my argument nonsense wasn't very polite, either. If you don't want to answer my question, we can just drop it and I'll move on. If you'd like to explain the reason for your comments then please do so without being accusatory. Which resources did you feel were noncompliant with MEDRS? Was it The Journal of Cancer Research, or The World Journal of Gastroenterology, or PLoS One? All are reputable review articles in scientific journals that publish peer reviewed research in compliance with WP:MEDSCI: Scientific journals are the best place to find both primary source articles about experiments, including medical studies, and secondary sources. Every rigorous scientific journal is peer reviewed. I think it would be a nice gesture on your part to explain why you thought they were not compliant. Atsme☯Consult Agent 99 21:46, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Her Battle for Existence
The article Her Battle for Existence 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Her Battle for Existence for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 13:41, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Cupid at the Circus
The article Cupid at the Circus 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Cupid at the Circus for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 14:01, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
American films
Great job on the silents BTW. Can you ensure though that the films are all listed on the lists like List of American films of 1910 so they can be accessed? I just added Pocahontas.♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- I'll probably pull them from the category later on, the only problem is that this results in hundreds and hundreds of films being added to the list. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:18, 27 February 2015 (UTC)
- Bring it on :-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:27, 28 February 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
.jpg)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader 
Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as 
Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, 
Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
AHeneen (submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;- And last but not least,
Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:54, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 March newsletter
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp (submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 (submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
- Cwmhiraeth (submissions) took Bumblebee, a level-4 vital article, to Good Article;
- AHeneen (submissions) worked-up the Malaysia Airlines Flight 370 article, also to Good Article status;
- Rodw (submissions) developed an extremely timely article to Good Article, taking Magna Carta there some 800 years after it was first sealed;
- And last but not least, Godot13 (submissions) (FP bonus points) worked up a number of Featured Pictures during round 1, including the 1948 one Deutsche Mark (pictured right), receiving the maximum bonus due to the number of Wikis that the related article appears in.
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
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. Figureskatingfan (talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa (talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
(Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 05:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 10, 2015)
 There are many backup dancers accompanying the dances of the main dancer.
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Trailer Trash • Ice cream parlour Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:58, 2 March 2015 (UTC) • |
|---|
maybe Project for the New American Century also needs improvement?
Hitting an interesting editor who thinks we can link individual living persons three or more times in a single article which accuses them of promoting genocide etc. :( The material consists of chunks of the pamphlet issued - making sure a lot os on ALL CAPS to make sure it looks loony <g>, then listing any person who is connected to the material, along with a lit of any connection to the Bush administration (even though that part is pure SYNTH), and making sure that any information that some of the people cited are 9/11 conspiracy theorists is avoided. Argh - sometimes I wonder how in heck some of these people survive at times. Cheers, and apologies for this vent. Collect (talk) 12:20, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 13:22, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
Nomination of List of anime by release date for deletion
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article List of anime by release date is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of anime by release date until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Knowledgekid87 (talk) 03:37, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Two Roses
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Two Roses 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 Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 15:41, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Winter's Tale (1910 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Winter's Tale (1910 film) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 21:01, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
Books and Bytes - Issue 10
The Wikipedia Library
Books & Bytes
Issue 10, January-February 2015
by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs), Sadads (talk · contribs)
- New donations - ProjectMUSE, Dynamed, Royal Pharmaceutical Society, and Women Writers Online
- New TWL coordinator, conference news, and a new guide and template for archivists
- TWL moves into the new Community Engagement department at the WMF, quarterly review
MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:40, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Cyber Arts Int.
Thanks, Chris, I let HighBeam go and appreciate the offer. I've got the guy sending me the book and I'll see what I need beyond that and the two journal review articles, if anything. I suspect those three things will pretty much suffice. The Boston events actually seem fairly important and are definitely better documented in a quick Google sweep. —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 19:27, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi, this article is on hold - I reviewed it a while ago and forgot to formally hold it, so you have a week from today to fix the issues and I'll promote. If its not done a week from now I'll have to fail the article (as I'll be on the road and won't be able to check it for a few weeks).
Best--Jackyd101 (talk) 20:56, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Liberty Arming the Patriot
The article Liberty Arming the Patriot 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Liberty Arming the Patriot for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 21:00, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Cupid at the Circus
The article Cupid at the Circus you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Cupid at the Circus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 11:41, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Jenks' Day Off
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jenks' Day Off 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 DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 13:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Winter's Tale (1910 film)
The article The Winter's Tale (1910 film) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Winter's Tale (1910 film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 18:21, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Writing on the Wall (1910 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article The Writing on the Wall (1910 film) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 19:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Shooting of Michael Brown
To avoid confusion, I moved your draft article to User:ChrisGualtieri/Shooting of Michael Brown--temp. As you know, it can;t stay there indefinitely. DGG ( talk ) 10:06, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- @DGG: - I much rather put that episode behind me. I do not want to edit with such partisan editors again - so it can be deleted as I think it served its purpose. Thanks. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- I have not followed the discussion here, but if it contains possibly useful material that it was decided not to put in the article, it should go somewhere. Suggestions? DGG ( talk ) 20:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC) �
- @DGG: - I much rather put that episode behind me. I do not want to edit with such partisan editors again - so it can be deleted as I think it served its purpose. Thanks. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 19:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Jenks' Day Off
The article Jenks' Day Off 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Jenks' Day Off for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 21:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Writing on the Wall (1910 film)
The article The Writing on the Wall (1910 film) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Writing on the Wall (1910 film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Winter's Tale (1910 film)
The article The Winter's Tale (1910 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Winter's Tale (1910 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 23:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Liberty Arming the Patriot
The article Liberty Arming the Patriot you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Liberty Arming the Patriot for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jackyd101 -- Jackyd101 (talk) 17:41, 6 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Not Guilty (1910 film)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Not Guilty (1910 film) 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 DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 00:41, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Not Guilty (1910 film)
The article Not Guilty (1910 film) 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Not Guilty (1910 film) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 01:21, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
DS at Emerson
Do you know if Emerson is covered under the 1RR for BLP DS? I tried to complete a sentence I forgot to finish re:Ok City bombing and it was reverted twice. The first time I forgot to add the page #, the 2nd time I added the page # but then it was reverted for some lame reason. Not sure if I should just go ahead and go for the 1RR or what. Your advice would be appreciated. Atsme☯Consult 04:00, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Atsme: BLPs are not under 1RR automatically and I don't see a 1RR sanction on the talk page. I would hold back for a bit on that page, despite you being in the right on the 1995 matter - this type of issue is not going to be resolved immediately. Despite having proven Cwobeel's sources to be biased and wrong - as long as another person "objects" disputes can fester indefinitely. In a form of game theory - it is actually the good faith person who usually leaves because few people seek or get enjoyment from conflict. While most people like to "win" conflicts - the actual dispute is not and editors will break away unless they feel strongly. The removal of the WTC reference for 1993 is a bit odd... but the article is improving and that's important... I just like my silent films and such because I don't need to deal with any of this drama. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hate leaving it with an unfinished sentence. Here is the NY Times piece [2] (3rd source) that backs up what was stated in the other sources I cited to complete Emerson's sentence. The summary of the last revert states Rv per WP:UNDUE... not representative of published opinion. - which makes no sense to me at all.
I hear you on the silent film project. Atsme☯Consult 04:34, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Atsme: Exactly - a completely invalid and frankly confusing "policy-based revert". I mean seriously... without knowing the significance and reference to 1993, the reader is not sure to what Emerson is referring to! Wikipedia has a clear liberal stance and any "drama" ripe for the picking is easily added. I dislike political matters and I very familiar with the amount of completely false information that circulates as "news". ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:43, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Atsme: Since Cwobeel restored the problematic material... yet again... I've taken it to WP:AE and asked for 1RR to help solve the issue since a 1 month protection did not help. You were right to change your stance on the inclusion of the gaff and that is why I decided to also support the additional context and better sources surrounding the criticism. I actually have to delicately deal with really biased sources in my old film articles - The New York Dramatic Mirror has the been evaluation of the films I am working on, but they are so biased it is a bit funny. The biggest criticism they gave in one review was that shadows were not cast away from a lamp in a minor scene... which didn't focus on the lamp at all. Got to love some of the spoilers and fighting between the Licensed and Independents! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 06:54, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Atsme: Exactly - a completely invalid and frankly confusing "policy-based revert". I mean seriously... without knowing the significance and reference to 1993, the reader is not sure to what Emerson is referring to! Wikipedia has a clear liberal stance and any "drama" ripe for the picking is easily added. I dislike political matters and I very familiar with the amount of completely false information that circulates as "news". ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:43, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
- Thank you. I hate leaving it with an unfinished sentence. Here is the NY Times piece [2] (3rd source) that backs up what was stated in the other sources I cited to complete Emerson's sentence. The summary of the last revert states Rv per WP:UNDUE... not representative of published opinion. - which makes no sense to me at all.
- @Atsme: BLPs are not under 1RR automatically and I don't see a 1RR sanction on the talk page. I would hold back for a bit on that page, despite you being in the right on the 1995 matter - this type of issue is not going to be resolved immediately. Despite having proven Cwobeel's sources to be biased and wrong - as long as another person "objects" disputes can fester indefinitely. In a form of game theory - it is actually the good faith person who usually leaves because few people seek or get enjoyment from conflict. While most people like to "win" conflicts - the actual dispute is not and editors will break away unless they feel strongly. The removal of the WTC reference for 1993 is a bit odd... but the article is improving and that's important... I just like my silent films and such because I don't need to deal with any of this drama. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 04:18, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Disambiguation link notification for March 7
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited The City of Her Dreams, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Travelogue. 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) 09:19, 7 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Two Roses
The article The Two Roses 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:The Two Roses for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 10:41, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Her Battle for Existence
The article Her Battle for Existence you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Her Battle for Existence for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 11:01, 8 March 2015 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 11, 2015)
.jpg) Turkish cuisine
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Backup dancer • Trailer Trash Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 00:26, 9 March 2015 (UTC) • |
|---|
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 01:18, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Jenks' Day Off
The article Jenks' Day Off you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jenks' Day Off for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 07:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of Not Guilty (1910 film)
The article Not Guilty (1910 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Not Guilty (1910 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of DepressedPer -- DepressedPer (talk) 07:21, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
A barnstar for you!
|
The Special Barnstar |
| You're a really special contributor to wikipedia Chris! So focused and amazingly productive! If only others on here followed your example!! Thankyou for all the hard work you put into the project, you're a force of nature! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:52, 10 March 2015 (UTC) |
Silent films
Amazing how prolific you've been on films from the 1910-13 period! Great to see quality from that period which is often neglected and perma stubs on here. Can I ask why the specific interest in them? I started A Dog's Love, great film. Could be brought up to GA too.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:45, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
- I like the films from that era and its a gap in our collective coverage. Started with researching Lon Chaney. I also have lots of reference works and access to quite a few books which enables me to get a lot of information on films. I'm trying for complete coverage of Thanhouser - but I have an eye on Universal's works as well. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 13:55, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Two Roses
The article The Two Roses you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Two Roses for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Good888 -- Good888 (talk) 20:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Your GA nomination of The Writing on the Wall (1910 film)
The article The Writing on the Wall (1910 film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Writing on the Wall (1910 film) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar (talk) 22:01, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
Question about Questia
Hello there, Chris! I've noticed you're a coordinator of Questia Online Library, so I would like to ask you a question. Is it possible to sign up for Questia if I basically participate in Russian Wikipedia, not EnWiki? Thank you! FrozenWolf (talk) 19:32, 4 March 2015 (UTC)
- @FrozenWolf: Yes. It is for all languages. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- That’s good. In RuWiki my count of edits is about 10,000 and account is three years old. My RuWiki account’s name is not same as here, but I have unified email on Mail.Ru, so I can confirm if necessary. FrozenWolf (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- You would need to apply and have e-mail enabled in order to receive the code. I've followed the work of other RuWiki users - they have some better info on topics that Enwiki has! When I Google my films, I get a lot of RuWiki hits from stubs and partial lists. Just sign up at WP:QUESTIA so I can get you the code you need. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 17:13, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- That’s good. In RuWiki my count of edits is about 10,000 and account is three years old. My RuWiki account’s name is not same as here, but I have unified email on Mail.Ru, so I can confirm if necessary. FrozenWolf (talk) 16:22, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
- @FrozenWolf: Yes. It is for all languages. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:04, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I've activated account on Questia. Thank you very much! I hope It'll be very helpful for my work. FrozenWolf (talk) 18:42, 11 March 2015 (UTC)
WP:NEWBLPBAN
I'm at a loss as to how this differs from BLP policy, and even more so by the shortcut "new blp ban". Could you give me a brief explanation?. Thanks.--Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 02:24, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Two kinds of pork: - All BLPs are under WP:AC/DS at all times so the higher standards are expected. The battleground atmosphere and edit warring over BLP and casting aspersions are all sanctionable actions, though the reason I took it to AE was the edit warring in violation of BLP policy which states the material at BLPN is not to be reinserted until consensus forms and in this case a formal closure was requested. Cwobeel did ignore that and now the article is locked again for two months due to continued actions, but I don't know how to stop disruption on the page... so I give up. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 02:35, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- Just curious about the shortcut. New + ban in particular. To me it does not grok.--Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 04:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm not taking sides. I've had EW issues with Cwobel in the past, but I attribute that to passion and not bad faith. Thanks for the reply, but I'm still confused as heck about that shortcut :). --Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 15:37, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- @Two kinds of pork: Shortcut for more senior Wikipedians I guess.. I don't think Cwobeel is acting in bad faith, but I believe that Cwobeel is unable to recognize errors and respond appropriately to fix them. Cwobeel's notions of several policies lack maturity and understanding of the ideas behind them. I take my research very seriously, even for Wikipedia, and I'm about to go scold the good Dr. Blofield over this monstrosity which was clearly in error for nearly a decade. A mere glance and I knew it was false... I thought it was vandalism at first. Don't use IMDb for anything. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 15:41, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- BTW, I'm not taking sides. I've had EW issues with Cwobel in the past, but I attribute that to passion and not bad faith. Thanks for the reply, but I'm still confused as heck about that shortcut :). --Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 15:37, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
- Just curious about the shortcut. New + ban in particular. To me it does not grok.--Two kinds of porkMakin'Bacon 04:33, 14 March 2015 (UTC)
Thanhouser Award
|
Thanhouser Award |
| They made so many films but our coverage of them is not sufficient enough at this point. Keep up your good work on these films. Skr15081997 (talk) 10:43, 15 March 2015 (UTC) |
- Thanks! About 6% done! I'll keep it up! ChrisGualtieri (talk) 12:25, 15 March 2015 (UTC)
This week's article for improvement (week 12, 2015)
Hello, ChrisGualtieri.
The following is WikiProject Today's articles for improvement's weekly selection: Previous selections: Cuisine • Backup dancer Get involved with the TAFI project! You can... Posted by: MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of EuroCarGT (talk) 03:26, 16 March 2015 (UTC) • |
|---|
