Peer reviews with no or minimal feedback |
---|
|
|
If your review is not in the list of unanswered reviews, add it . |
This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will generally reply on your talk page. Although my email address is enabled, it is not an address I check often (so I may be slow in replying to email and very much prefer to have conversations here). Please also note that while I am glad to do a peer review on just about any article, it will often take me a few days, and I do not usually have the time to do copyedits (sorry). Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:31, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
Per your note on my talk page, just wanted to let you know that I listed John J. Crittenden at FAC this morning. Acdixon ( talk • contribs • count) 14:26, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you please take a look at and review this? It's been going on for 30+ days, and needs more input. Thanks, CTJF83 chat 18:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Are the external links added to the Hyners okay? I cannot see them here at work. I am still working on NC categories, then I might be game for a state park FA drive if you want and I am not too busy with school. Dincher ( talk) 22:43, 4 January 2011 (UTC)
Could I ask you to briefly visit the above article's talkpage, and leave a comment on the recently-added section about the portrayal of Lang in a recent film? Thanks, Brianboulton ( talk) 00:40, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
-- Kumioko ( talk) 03:17, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
Can you explain why my article on Body Rocka has been deleted when it is an informative article and has been written in the same format as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shake_Weight ????
Fitness Freak — Preceding unsigned comment added by Fitness Freak ( talk • contribs) 15:05, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on January 13, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 13, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 ( talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch Talk and C. 21:10, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
The Forksville Covered Bridge is a Burr arch truss covered bridge over Loyalsock Creek in the borough of Forksville, Sullivan County, in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania. It was built in 1850 and is 152 feet 11 inches (46.61 m) in length. The bridge was placed on the National Register of Historic Places in 1980. The Forksville bridge is named for the borough it is in, which is named for its location at the confluence or "forks" of the Little Loyalsock and Loyalsock Creeks. The Forksville bridge is a Burr arch truss type, with a load-bearing arch sandwiching multiple vertical king posts, for strength and rigidity. The building of the Forksville bridge was supervised by the 18-year-old Sadler Rogers, who used his hand-carved model of the structure. It served as the site of a stream gauge from 1908 to 1913 and is still an official Pennsylvania state highway bridge. The United States Department of Transportation Federal Highway Administration uses it as the model of a covered bridge "classic gable roof", and it serves as the logo of a Pennsylvania insurance company. The bridge was restored in 1970 and 2004 and is still in use, with average daily traffic of 217 vehicles in 2006. Despite the restorations, as of 2006 the bridge structure's sufficiency rating on the National Bridge Inventory was only 17.4 percent and its condition was deemed "basically intolerable requiring high priority of corrective action". ( more...)
Congratulations. Just noticed the above announcement. I will re-add it to my watch list. Finetooth ( talk) 21:47, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
What the hed says. Actually, there was once an award for 500 DYKs, the only one of the ones on my userpage that WP:RIBBONS doesn't list as deprecated (because it doesn't list it at all anymore). Daniel Case ( talk) 22:10, 13 January 2011 (UTC)
Ping! The PR for the Johnstown Inclined Plane is up. Glad to see an simple solution was found to the Forksville debacle. Niagara Don't give up the ship 04:22, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for the Barnstar. The great thing about barnstars is that they are almost always unexpected. You do great work yourself on Pennsylvania and other topics, but I do have a minor request. If you work on a Pennsylvania article, check the talk page, and add a class or importance as needed. I am nearly done with Pittsburgh templates (about 500 articles left), but there are thousands of Pennsylvania articles with no assessments, or no importance ratings. I need help if the goal of no unrated Pennsylvania articles is to be reached. -- DThomsen8 ( talk) 15:14, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
To let you know, I have sent this to FAC today. As I said at the peer review, one likely issue is the justification for the non-free image used to identify Cruttwell. I'd be glad if you would add your comment on this, should the issue become a point of contention. Thanks for your help on this. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:49, 16 January 2011 (UTC)
Could you do an image review on this article? For some reason it has fallen through the cracks at FAC. Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 02:32, 18 January 2011 (UTC)
There use to be a time when long WP:PR reviews were truncated. A quick scan at PR today seems to show that this is no longer done. Please advise.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 01:36, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Ohio River Trail
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ohio_River_Trail
Please add the following additional references for the Ohio River Trail National Park Service grant:
http://www.nps.gov/ncrc/programs/rtca/whatwedo/projects/PA.pdf
http://www.ohiorivertrail.org/attachments/124_ORTC_NPS%20Press%20Release%20January%2018,%202011.pdf
http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/pittsburgh/s_718766.html
Troiaeye ( talk) 15:50, 19 January 2011 (UTC)
Sorry to trouble you, but as you did the image review on the Cruttwell FAC, could you respond to the image query lately raised? My undeerstanding is that a fair use rationale is required if an image is not free in the US, which this is not, having been published after 1923. Brianboulton ( talk) 01:01, 20 January 2011 (UTC)
Since nearly every comment of yours has been satisfied, I was wondering what else is needed to be improved before GA nomination. Thanks a lot for your time on those comments, they were really helpful :) Sp33dyphil ( Talk) ( Contributions)(I love Wikipedia!) 10:00, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
I know you get sidetracked on a lot of unimportant things, but I did run into a couple of important CCC NRHP articles: Comfort Station No. 68 and Comfort Station No. 72
Smallbones ( talk) 21:34, 22 January 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. This image has certainly had an interesting life. Finetooth ( talk) 03:36, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
Acdixon ( talk • contribs • count) 16:37, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
getting in the way. Busy, busy, busy. But that keeps me out of trouble. Dincher ( talk) 02:30, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Thank you, it's a nice little town. Dincher ( talk) 02:33, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
Hi! Two main sources of photos are uploaded to Wikipedia Commons. One is if the photographers (or we) upload them directly to Commons. Or, thanks to User:Magnus Manske, there are a couple upload bots which would bring all the pics posted by photograhers from Flickr, and do it intact-Anything written on each photo page is transferred to Commons. (We can also upload manually, which I usually do.)
When uploading a photo, change the file name to include his name. So, the file would look like [[File:DixieChicks_byRon_Baker.jpg]] Like that. And in the upload part of Commons, here: [1] Halfway down, you'll see, after Description, it says: "Other versions", where I place the photographer's commercial website. ALSO, if the pic is for an article ranked Stub, Start, etc., not anywhere near a GA review, what's the harm in putting the photographer's name in the caption on the page itself? It inspires trust with us, (but I don't promise anything though). It gives some sort of "bragging rights" to the photographer's family/friends. If the photographer wants to give us a whole bunch of photos, we can also make a whole new Category in Commons- like if you check the photo in Emily Robison's infobox to Commons, you see she's in a Catgory:KirkStauffer photo. Lastly, I remind those who are super worried about losing their "rights", I point out--- bad people steal. They don't give a damn WHAT kind of license it might have- they just take! So, in the long run.. you see? And there IS one good benefit to post pics on WP: by having images on WP, the photographer gains global exposure to far more prospective customers than they would otherwise, so the recognition is worth it.
WOW. I hope I didn't run on for too long! Best Regards, -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 22:57, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
Hey Ruhr,
I could use a hand with a wily and pesky IP over at Plum Island Animal Disease Center. There has been an IP adding uncited material about some "monster" that washed up in New York supposedly connected to the center. I removed it a few times but I'm not going to edit war some IP so I then just tagged the material as citation needed and the section with undue weight, kind of as a compromise I guess. I have warned the IP several times. I'm thinking a page protection or maybe a block might be in order. I reported it as "vandalism" but it's not really and the turnaround on that page looks a bit slow, so I was hoping you could check out the recent history and maybe take some kind of action. Thanks, no one else seems to be paying attention to the page at all, and I cannot really change things without going 3RR. IvoShandor ( talk) 23:34, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
WOW, you never menioned that the person you wrote about was a celebrity! That makes a big difference. I've tried my best to ignore every Wikipedia rule about photos-- but I do know that if the photographer is in the group, we have a great reason to place their names in the photo credits as long as it's wikified to prevent newbies and annoying people from tampering with it. I do it for David Gans, who provided a bunch of 1970s photos for the Wikipedia including our best black and white pics of The Last Waltz by The Band, amongst other things. Funny about the Studs Terkel photo- I had it in my next Flickr "shopping list" to try to replace that horrible picture! Since Terkel is both a sociologist, and musician (that one surprised me!) Anyway if you are working on his biography, here's something of interest: James Taylor wrote a song based on Terkel's book: [2] After hearing his introduction to the song, I just thought that was kind of cool; (trivia maybe though)! Looks good. If you need to introduce me to help him, feel free anytime. OH, and believe me, I know how exciting it is to get a notable person to answer you personally. Between the responses from Cat Stevens/ Yusuf Islam response, and a couple others- how do you think I got childhood photos of Derek Trucks?! :). -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 06:57, 28 January 2011 (UTC)
A user, User:Winstonsmith99, has been adding material to the Delius article, which is at present at peer review and likely to be nominated to FAC soon. Some of this editor's contributions are worthwhile, but others are trivia (including reposting of trivia previously removed) or are of little relevance. He does not communicate his suggestions, merely posts them with unhelpful edit summaries. I have dealt with his recent postings, as detailed on the article's talkpage. However, I have suspicions about this editor; there are several usernames remarkably similar to this one, all which seem to be problematic. For example User:WinstonSmit, a suspect sockpuppet; User:WinstonSmith an Esperanto expert, evidently; User:WinstonSmith147 (a blank userpage); User:Winstonsmith99/Chris hodges (apparently a lawyer); and User:Winstonsmith1984, a blocked sockpuppet. User:Winstonsmith99 follows the practice of all the above, providing a blank usepage and no replies to talkpage messages. Is there anything that can be done? For what it may be worth, I have left a note on Winstonsmith99's talkpage asking for cooperation. Brianboulton ( talk) 20:04, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Ruhrfisch. I have taken note of your peer review of Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows ( [3], [4], [5]), but there are two things I have questions about: what do you want me to remove from the epilogue section? There isn't many things that I can remove from that section that doesn't come up again in the next (a la Teddy Lupin and Victoire Weasley). The second thing is: What things don't flow with the article? Please reply. Thanks, Guy546( Talk) 16:44, 2 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, I was a bit surprised it was picked. Considering it was my first FA ever, I had to do a quick cleanup of broken URLs, refs that probably would not pass WP:RS, outdated/irrelevant info and 4 years of accumulated cruft, but I think it came out rather well. Niagara Don't give up the ship 02:46, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
Starting with the February 2011 issue WikiProject United States has established a newsletter to inform anyone interested in United States related topics of the latest changes. This newsletter will not only discuss issues relating to WikiProject United States but also:
You may read or assist in writing the newsletter, subscribe, unsubscribe or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following this link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page or the Newsletters talk page. -- Kumioko ( talk) 20:48, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
To reinforce my note on Brianboulton's talk page, I crave pardon for my stupidity in getting two of WP's luminaries mixed up in what passes for my mind. Your indulgence is greatly appreciated! Tim riley ( talk) 18:47, 5 February 2011 (UTC)
You might be interested in Sodom Schoolhouse (NRHP and PHMC marker). Smallbones ( talk) 07:26, 6 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for reviewing the page, your tips were very helpful and I will definately implement these changes. I have not been able to find any reliable source to indicate that there were other nominees from 1958 to 1976. I will keep searching in case I do come across the additional nominees but if I'm unable to locate them what would I do? DonEd ( talk) 06:04, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch,
Article: Treaty of Narva
I appreciate your comments on the "Peer Review" page of the Treaty of Narva that I've started (the Peer Review process). It is not one of my main interest or strong points, wanted to help clear up and get feedback from another person or people, who would give suggestions from their view point. Once you think the Peer Review has expired or had long enough to be replied to by other contributors, feel free to archive it on the "Discussion" page. Once again, I appreciate your time and comments. Anything in return, I'm willing to look at. Adamdaley ( talk) 06:24, 7 February 2011 (UTC)
Hello,
Would you be able to assist with an issue at the above referenced page? I am having difficulty understanding the justification for listing the article in a parent category. The issue has been discussed at User talk:Srobak I am either having difficulty understanding that user's explanation, or the user is not providing an explanation. I'm not quite sure what to do and would appreciate any assistance. Thanks, Gjs238 ( talk) 19:03, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
Please accept this star as a token of thanks for your help in getting Frederick Delius to FA standard. This was truly the work of many hands, and your particular contribution was much valued. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:52, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
You may have noticed I have resumed per reviewing after two weeks of preoccupation not just with Delius but with my TFA project against the clock, Handel's opera Rinaldo, which has the tercentenary of its premiere on 24 February. I hope to get it to FAC later this week, and if it can clear that hurdle in say 10 days, it may be in with a chance - though there are other TFA requests for that date. Brianboulton ( talk) 22:30, 8 February 2011 (UTC)
The Chemistry Star | ||
For your helpful and insightful comments at the
rhodocene FAC, plus going above and beyond supporting in providing translation work to resolve the "protonated" issue, I award you this Chemistry Star! Well Done and Thank you. EdChem ( talk) 05:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC) |
If you prefer to display ribbons rather than barnstars, you might be interested to know that a Chemistry Star Ribbon is available, File:Chemistry Star Ribbon.png, as shown at right. EdChem ( talk) 05:53, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
I thought I'd let you know that Rinaldo has now gone to FAC. At the moment TFA for 24 February is still open, but Rinaldo won't get there on points - a music article is scheduled for 12 February, so we have to trust to luck. Anyway, if you can check out the sources, that will be a start - many thanks. Brianboulton ( talk) 00:01, 10 February 2011 (UTC)
Thank you. Much appreciated. I didn't actually know I had done so many in one month. Finetooth ( talk) 06:17, 11 February 2011 (UTC)
The edit warring is still going on. I have weighed in on Nyttend's talk page as there has been no discussion of the matter on the Template talk page. I favor excluding all the "communities." There are far too many and many are ambiguous as to their location and name. For example, Faxon, it's an exit, but most people just call it Loyalsock. What is and what isn't Nisbet is another interesting discussion. Dincher ( talk) 20:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi, the article Herbie Hewett, for which you kindly conducted a peer review, is currently listed as a Featured article candidate, and I wondered if you might be interested in participating in the review: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Herbie Hewett/archive1. Thanks, Harrias talk 22:25, 13 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey, when you get a chance, take a look at the edit history of Kent State University and see if you could offer some insight. I posted a comment at Talk:Kent State University#Enrollment as well. There is question because Kent State releases separate Fall and Spring enrollment numbers and a well-meaning editor really wants to change the phrase that says Kent State is "second-largest" in Ohio to "third-largest" since the KSU Spring enrollment number is now lower than what the University of Cincinnati has listed for Fall (the source simply lists enrollment as "2010-2011"). At the KSU article, the "second-largest" has an actual source from September that states in its title and subtitles "KSU now No. 2 in state: Surpasses Cincinnati enrollment by eight students; now second in size only to The Ohio State University". I don't want an edit war and have already changed it twice today and left comments at the talk page and the other user's talk page. Thanks -- JonRidinger ( talk) 20:59, 14 February 2011 (UTC)
Sometime ago, you carried out a peer review of the article Christchurch, Dorset so I thought you might like to know that it was made a 'Good article' yesterday.-- Ykraps ( talk) 07:15, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Hi Rührfisch,
Bugging you because, I think, you do a lot of image reviews at FAC (or maybe I'm just imagining that?). I was going to ask Durova, but she just threatened to shoot, roast, and eat me; and since she didn't specify in what order I figured it was best not to chance it. Anyways…
We're bringing an article to FAC in the near future and have run into a bit of an issue regarding what the actual expectations at FAC will be concerning sourcing for images ( WP:IUP isn't being helpful). The images are all 16–18th-century paintings and drawings, and as such are quite obviously out of copyright. However the various uploaders (some as far back as 2006) have mostly tagged them with information on where the, say, drawing was first published and who drew/painted it; and has not specified where they found it reproduced (i.e. it could be snarfed off the web somewhere, or it could have been scanned from a modern book, etc.). So we're in the situation where the images are quite clearly fine legally speaking, and properly tagged etc., but we're unsure what additional sourcing information will be required at FAC.
Any chance you could shed some light? Has this sort of issue popped up before? Alternatively, could you suggest someone else I could bug about this? -- Xover ( talk) 18:26, 15 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for mentioning Esperanza Spalding's photo that I uploaded. It's wonderful to know that it went anywhere, but since the article was about how lax we are to patrol our own BLPs, it was depressing. I really want to see the Wikipedia flourish. I did note that the commentator did credit Wikipedia for the photo and lead of the article, at least. Spaulding's page isn't mine, really. I mean, I've uploaded 850 or so photos used on at least 20 Wikipedias-- but when I do score some good pics, I always have to go in and do some really serious copyediting, just so when I do add the photo(s) the photographer can see a half-decent result. It's really important to do that; since half of what I do for the Wikipedia is email and convince people to give up most of their rights to their own work, I want them to be pleased and return to us! Not glamorous to be a Wikignome.. most people don't know we exist. My thanks to you though! Leahtwosaints ( talk) 13:10, 16 February 2011 (UTC)
I forgot to mention my appreciation for your time and how valuable your work is here. The little cookie dish kinds of gestures are (sort of) corny, but honestly, not many Admins. take the time to discuss things the way you do. If I was better with graphics here, I'd send you a whole virtual case of Häagen-Dazs ice cream! Have you heard back from Roger Ebert? If not, I can A) look for a better photo of Studs Terkel, and B) email him myself-- I approch each request with a lot of delicacy. It's your call. And finally, thanks for helping with the many faces of garbage people dump on the Wikipedia. Here is a proposal-- if I find any articles have violated copyright laws, or vandalism I'll surely contact you, especially BLPs. But I also know that 'Admins. have the ability to bestow rollbacker rights. I'm asking you as an Admin., here to allow me that privilege. It is time saving, etc. I am very careful with all my work involving the en.Wikipedia, in particular. Will you please bestow that ability to me? I'll appreciate any answer! -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 19:04, 20 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you take one last look at this before I nominate it for FA? Anything that needs tweaking? anything that stands out as needing some more work? As always you have been a great help with your reviews. -- Jeremy ( blah blah • I did it!) 09:42, 21 February 2011 (UTC)
We may be designing a better approach to this topic. Our previous discussion of Uploading pics, with file names, adding the photographer's name in the actual file, as we discussed, [[File:DixieChicks_byRon_Baker.jpg]] making a Category in Wikimedia Commons for certain people's photos? Helps on Commons! But en.Wiki has some photo policy not to place a photographer's name on the main page with the captions. I sometimes get by it b/c 95% of the time, I'm adding photos to pages that haven't yet gone beyond C-Status. I look up the most active editor in the article history, and request leaving the attribution until it reaches GA review. An article with only 2 refs obviously won't be harmed in those cases! Sometimes it works. Until recently, even FA-ranked Bob Dylan still had my attributiions with my uploaded photos but it but is now down. What's the harm? Some editors only agree to leave the attribution there IF the photographer is notable, as with David Gans, and still they get pulled down at some point. We need new, actual policy changes! This is where your connections come in. Being computer illiterate, I never have even looked at the Village Pump, but you do. Maybe you can bring this photo attribution thing up for discussion, and find a happy middle ground. Also you can reach Ebert via Facebook, and I'm not involved in ANY social networking group thing like that. We really need to tighten the understanding of what is and isn't OK in captions altogether!
Hi Ruhrfisch... FYI, you have email. EdChem ( talk) 12:41, 22 February 2011 (UTC)
Could you help me at Hanover Township, Columbiana County, Ohio? An editor keeps restoring an unsourced bit about a recent gas explosion — as it turns out, it's because it happened on his family's property. Nyttend ( talk) 02:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your peer review of RAF Uxbridge. I've been on an extended break from Wikipedia and have only just seen your comments. With some effort and a bit of luck thrown in it can be a good article. Harrison49 ( talk) 13:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
I finally finished work on List of longest main-stem rivers in the United States, asked for a PR, and posted a note on the rivers project page. I pursued the north-flowing idea for a while longer after asking for advice, then abandoned it when the data did not seem to reveal anything interesting. The list I ended up with was kind of a surprise and full of its own complications. I was happy to find the Ruth Patrick quote, which should make it clear to readers that there is no precise official list or any way to make one. I'm hoping that this one is a reasonably close approximation. Finetooth ( talk) 21:13, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
Hey mate, I brought CSI effect to FAC, and after incorporating some very useful feedback on a variety of issues, the consensus was that the article should be reviewed for wordiness/clunkiness/etc by an uninvolved editor. Any chance you would like to be that lucky person? -- Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:22, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
I've added the Susquehanna to the also-ran list in the lead. I had hoped originally to include it in the main list. I thought it might make it since according to Rivers of North America it is 721 kilometres (448 mi) long. Then I realized that to be consistent I could only count the part from Sunbury downstream. If forks are tributaries, then the Susquehanna is only 200 kilometres (120 mi) long. Sigh. Finetooth ( talk) 03:40, 1 March 2011 (UTC)
During the recent Rinaldo FAC you suggested to me that I might tackle Handel's Messiah. I've been looking at the article, and it certainly doesn't do the required justice to this masterpiece. So I've decided to take up your suggestion - though I won't be able to start for a while, due to prior commitments. Also, I am slowing down on my content work to avoid possible burnout; I find FACs particularly stressful at the moment, and struggle to keep my temper sometimes. How are your own plans? Not much recent evidence of the famous bridges; I hope to see that series, or something similar, resume soon. Brianboulton ( talk) 12:03, 2 March 2011 (UTC)
I've been informed that I am not to strike out tasks as I complete them. Mea culpa. Tom Reedy ( talk) 01:36, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
I've incorporated the image you uploaded in the article. I'd love to use the image of the pardon, too, but I don't know how to get both that one and the penitentiary into the relevant section. Nevertheless, it probably merits an upload to Commons. There isn't currently a category for Blackburn there, but there should be. I don't work on Commons much, but I might take a stab at creating one later. Thanks for tracking these down. Acdixon ( talk • contribs • count) 15:09, 3 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch! It looks like You are one of the top peer-reviewers, and interested in literature. So I was wondering if You would be able to take a look at the above mentioned PR and make some comments. It really needs another look by someone who knows more about the "rules" on WP than myself, and You seems to be the perfect one to do that. My comments were not so well received but I really think the article (and the other articles that User:SingToMePlease are creating) needs to be better researched and expanded to be GA, there are much more information out there. It would also be very useful, I think, if a more experienced user could do a review now before he/she creates more articles, to avoid unnecessary cleanup in the future. If You don't have time, I understand. Thanks! Iusethis ( talk) 11:03, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
So you've got me doing some work at Commons now, and I've run up on an issue. This image is incorrectly identified as Charles Augustus Murray. As you can see here, it is actually a portrait of Kentucky Governor J. Proctor Knott. Not sure how moves and whatnot work on Commons. Can you help? Acdixon ( talk • contribs • count) 16:17, 4 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, do you have time at all to look over this article, and tell me what needs to be fixed before I renominate it for FA? Thanks, CTJF83 19:13, 5 March 2011 (UTC)
Hey! I was wondering if you could add a window of the locator of Khabarovsk Krai in the corner of File:Location map Khabarovsk Krai.png?♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:05, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Top left corner?♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:27, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Feel free to override the current map with the updated locator window. So long as you update the sourcing and credit the creator of the state locator!♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:31, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, oo I've discovered how to paste from in paint now so should be OK to do them myself now.
If you ever offend me I won't be shy in telling you. That type of thing gets me into a bit of trouble here now and then, but I'm bad at hiding disagreements. And I'm also surprised when I see that great minds don't always think alike! :-) Smallbones ( talk) 00:03, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
I've been working on this for a while - not at all my usual stuff. I have just nominated it for peer review; for reasons briefly indicated in the nom statement, I am anxious to get some heavyweight reviews in on this. No urgency, but I wonder if at some time you would cast an eye over it? I am making a similar request to Finetooth and to some other well-known hard cases; because of Driberg's controversial and indeed scandalous life, I am expecting attacks on the article, and would thus like to have identified the weaker areas well in advance of any possible FAC. This is not a request for hasty action; the article is going nowhere for a while, but I would be pleased if, when convenient, you could look at it. Brianboulton ( talk) 21:50, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Trouble brewing on the talkpage, I fear. Against my own judgement I have added a little material on the 1819-21 Russian expedition, only to receive a curt rejection and restatement of that editor's original views. He wants to impose inappropriate material, and must not be allowed to do so. Brianboulton ( talk) 11:26, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your comments on the Peer Review for Falkland Islands, we'll get on it. Wee Curry Monster talk 08:50, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
The curse of the broadband connection has struck again, and I am currently out of action as far as significant online activity is concerned. Can you please update the backlog? I also have two current PRs in the backlog, which I am working on but unable to continue. They should be OK for a couple more days, but if my problem persists I may have to withdraw from them. What a nuisance. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:45, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch, and thank you for your comments at WP:Peer review/List of U.S. state horses/archive1. I have a few questions, however. The horse list is based mainly upon U.S. official state dogs, which passed FLC recently. This list does not have the Notes or Comments column that you request, and it also includes information in the lead that is not present in the body (I thought this was common for FLs? I know it was present in List of Olympic medalists in equestrian, which I took to FL last year), and the map is also based off of that list. I've left more minor comments on the review page, but the differences you were requesting from the list that was already FL (and which this one was based off of) was my main concern. Thanks again, Dana boomer ( talk) 17:22, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Someone has requested that edits to Lackawanna State Forest be redacted. I am pretty sure that redacted is a fancy word for deleted. "They" are watching the internet at "work" and I am very busy IRL, hence the big drop off in my wiki-edits lately. What have you been up to in wikiworld? Dincher ( talk) 21:13, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Nastiness on the Monaca page. Slander, etc. Dincher ( talk) 23:34, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
I nominated List of longest main-stem rivers in the United States this morning. Your advice was, as usual, most helpful. Finetooth ( talk) 17:43, 15 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Ruhrfisch! If you have time and inclination I'd be most grateful for any thoughts you might like to add the peer review of the Thomas Beecham article. I'm hoping to get it to FA standard at some stage (no urgency) and any suggestions will be gladly received. Tim riley ( talk) 21:38, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
It's getting too big to edit. I'd guess there are over 300 items on the list. I did add File:Marshal Bridge Chesco.JPG but with some difficulty. In particular if I use the control-F search feature, the article crashes and I'm kicked off Wikipedia (presumably for technical reasons only!) I'll suggest splitting PA in half for the purposes of the list. Say Franklin, Juniata, Mifflin, Union, Lycoming and Tioga counties and everything to the east being in eastern PA. Smallbones ( talk) 02:13, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
I took a look at the page for Doyle Bramhall II, and was surprised to say the least! It was a poorly written article, but look at the history! It seems a new editor with only 4 edits reverted everything that was there. Maybe it's for the best? Who knows. You might have an opinion on it. Thanks. -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 11:29, 17 March 2011 (UTC)
Nice to see your image from Tudek. I'm curious — since Tudek and Houserville are less than a mile away, were you able to get any photos there that you've not yet uploaded? On a related note, I'm hoping to get some Pennsylvania photos before long: I'm planning a trip back to the far western part of the state in a few weeks, and I'm looking to illustrate a few of the articles at {{ Monongahela villages}}. Nyttend ( talk) 02:53, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello amigo. I wondered if you could do something. Can you shade in Asturias on File:Spain location map.svg and add it to the bottom right hand corner of File:Asturias location map.svg, but retain it as a svg? I can't for some reason keep it as an svg.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:52, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
I noticed that you created the article Template:State parks of Pennsylvania map. I would like to do the same thing for Louisiana, but I was wondering if you used a tool to help you or manually added the dots? Thanks. Michael miceli ( talk) 00:58, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
You recall our discussion of Roger Ebert and his lovely photos. Is there something I can do about facilitating that? Now for my shocker- my good friend (and outstanding photographer, here in Ballyshannon, Ireland), named Rik Walton has (on his website) great photos, and has allowed us some to use here. I saw a photo of who I thought was Mark Knopfler and Hal Lindes, from one of his Dire Straits concert photos-- bur he said it was David Knopfler, not Hal, so I uploaded it as he said. Heavy duty disussion on the talk pages, ensued re: who it was, and then I said, "speak to the camera guy". Someone must have done so, b/c Rik emails me with an apology and correction, after having been contacted by David Knopfler himself. Mind you, all of this was only last week!! So this AM I wake to find an email to me by David Knopfler of course. Now I have to respond, somehow. How will I answer him, without sounding like a blathering idiot fan, I'll never know. Seems turnabout is fair play, ed?!! -- Leahtwosaints ( talk) 23:52, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi. I noticed you created the insert I used to create Template:Location map United States Missouri St. Louis. I created the Buckingham Hotel that's all. Feel free to add it to other landmarks.♦ Dr. Blofeld 00:13, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
For the List of Pennsylvania state parks there is a column called "date founded". I was wondering what this is exactly, because for louisiana, many parks had been acquired and constructed, but funds didn't allow the parks to be open until years later. So, is date founded the year acquired, completed, or opened to the public? Thanks again 68.227.130.189 ( talk) 03:20, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
I have closed the above peer review. Unfortunately, I can't link from the talkpage to the archive in the normal way. Something to do with the article's name moving from Tom Driberg, Baron Bradwell during the peer review, I think. Could you possibly fix this? Many thanks. Brianboulton ( talk) 18:01, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch - Per your request, I am notifying you that List of U.S. state horses is now at FLC. The link for the review is Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of U.S. state horses/archive1. Thanks you again for your comments at the peer review! Dana boomer ( talk) 23:36, 26 March 2011 (UTC)
You have just removed accurate information from the Robert Falcon Scott article, without explanation. Do please explain! ( 204.112.57.130 ( talk) 00:51, 28 March 2011 (UTC))
Whoaa!! Now my reinstated accurate text has been deleted, together with the history record, without explanation! This goes higher. Vandalism!! ( 204.112.57.130 ( talk) 01:21, 28 March 2011 (UTC))
Thanks for your help with the review at WP:Featured article candidates/Shakespeare authorship question/archive1. In your comment "19:17, 27 March 2011 (UTC)" (currently at the bottom) you respond to Sandy. I may be confused, but I think you may want to reconsider your response. My understanding of what Sandy said ("Allrighty then, instead I'll have to go back...") is that she agrees to not restart the FAC. Also, while you are much more familiar with FA procedures than me, my gut feeling is that we shouldn't agonize over what "restart" means, and whether it is documented somewhere—that's not going to assist this review. Sandy makes the reasonable point that we cannot dismiss objections based on assumptions about who made them: we need to check each objection and consider any actionable points. Such consideration may lead to a decision that no action is required, or it may lead to an improvement of the article. While it's a shame that more work is required after all the enormous efforts so far, that's the nature of article development, and I'm sure that a couple of days focusing on the issues raised will deal with all outstanding issues. No need to reply, but if you agree with any of my thoughts here, you might like to refactor your comment? I'm not sure how best to do it, but someone needs to look for actionable items in any comments that have not been addressed. Johnuniq ( talk) 00:55, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
First of all, thanks for your very large set of comments. I really appreciate all the effort you put into them. I just wanted to let you know about a few particulars.
Again, thanks for the very detailed and comprehensive remarks; they will definitely be useful is moving this article along! — Torchiest talk edits 02:38, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
In favor of this user peer reviewing one of the articles I nominated. I am asking you to peer review this article here. I know you're good at it and I don't feel like I would be. Thanks. Jhenderson 777 15:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your input on List of Scream characters. Your notes all struck a chord and are useful items for me. You're right that merchandise wise there is only really Ghostface though. For sorting, I tried it before on the Saw characters article but people would point out that protagonist/antagonist/minor/etc was somewhat up for debate per character and difficult to manage. I agree on the Concept section but unfortunately few details exist about pretty much anything related to the background of the film, I've spent two weeks scouring for info and still have very little. If you don't mind I'm going to copy your notes onto the articles talk page to make sure its easily accessible.
Thanks for all the input, it's going to help me a lot Darkwarriorblake ( talk) 19:52, 31 March 2011 (UTC)