![]() | 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. |
User:Wikireader41 has violated wp:3rr by reverting Kanwar Pal Singh Gill four times in one single day. Please see revert 1, revert 2, revert 3 and revert 4 eventhough he was warned by another editor prior to that.
Since you've been making changes to the Sun FAR, I just wanted to let you know that I've left a few comments. :) JKBrooks85 ( talk) 11:13, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Hello... Can you please guide me how to report POV pushing... There is an admin called YellowMonkey who is an indian and keeps removing anything that goes against his country...Have a look at some of the edits YellowMonkey has been doing on State-sponsored terrorism Page... here , here, here, and here as well. How can he do that without ever participating on the talk Page...??? And here he even breaks the 3RR on 23 February, when Deavenger wasn't even a Block evading User.... And every time he reverted, he didn't merely changed minor things but actually removed the entire Indian Section which was backed by 26refs from WP:RS... Plus he is also recruiting people to counter my edits on a different topic here, maybe to lure me into an edit-war and block me... And here he shows Uncivil behaviour, And here is some more... All these talk-Pages where he has insulted me belong to editors who themselves are indian and revert any edit that is even slightly against India.... Isn't this POV.... Kindly guide me, where to take my case.... Discussions aren't helping a-lot.... He will block me If I revert his edit... His partner Wikireader41 (who is also an indian) keeps threatening me by a block.... I don't know what to do... I request that a neutral Admin look into the case..... Thank-You....Peace.... Adil your ( talk) 12:04, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Just a quick note of thanks for the speedy GA review :). Ironholds ( talk) 09:12, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
(moved to the user page)
Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 215 articles were swept in July! We are currently nearly 80% done with Sweeps, with under 600 articles left to review. With 50 members, that averages out to about 12 articles per person. Once the remaining articles drop to 100, I'll help in reviewing the last articles (I'm currently taking a break). If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 19:35, 1 August 2009 (UTC)
You must think I'm being deliberately obtuse, as you've now had to raise the "southern continents" and disease thing twice each. Sorry, it's not intentional :) The disease issue certainly deserves a note, will do in a few hours when I'm back where the references are. Euryalus ( talk) 20:46, 3 August 2009 (UTC)
You have helped me detail legal issues in the past. Can you lend any assistance to the second paragraph at McDonald's_Cycle_Center#Details.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 15:12, 27 July 2009 (UTC)
I've started an article, Albert Levitt about the movant in Ex parte Levitt and who was involved in a surprising number of other things, from being a territorial judge in the Virgin Islands to running against Nixon in the California Senate primary. TonyTheTiger has suggested I talk to you, I think because the notability of Levitt has been challenged. Could you take a look and give me the benefit of your advice?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 19:59, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Media circus has left town, I'd like to see how things go unprotected for a while. Do you mind trying it out? Or at least, set an expiry. I'm not a fan of indef semi especially on non-BLPs. – xeno talk 23:00, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Russ, How do I challenge a possible copyright violation at File:Leda2(moon).jpg? -- Kheider ( talk) 16:49, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
This image claims to be the 1974 discovery image of Leda taken by Voyager before it was launched in 1977. I am having trouble finding this image on a NASA site. -- Kheider ( talk) 20:15, 10 August 2009 (UTC)
I have been in contact with Palomar and they have confirmed that it is their image. Can you please help me write-up the permission for the Samuel Oschin telescope image File:Leda2(moon).jpg? (I have summarized it, but I do not know what permission tags to put on it.) -- Kheider ( talk) 19:47, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
There is another FAR, not solar system, but I figured you might be interested. I'll leave this here and leave a note to Serendi. ceran thor 15:06, 11 August 2009 (UTC)
Greetings,
It has been five months since you expressed an interest in taking the electron article through for FAC. Since that time, the article has undergone further review and improvements. I would like to see it pushed through the FAC process again in the near future (if only to find out if there are any further issues that need to be addressed.) Would you object to me taking it through the FAC? Alternatively we can do it as a co-nomination, or I can wait some more if you were planning to push for FA soon. Thank you.— RJH ( talk) 19:20, 14 August 2009 (UTC)
I'm currently in Thailand and have limited access to computers, so I won't be able to do serious work for several days. But I still have Miranda on my to-do list, and will give Titania a look. Serendi pod ous 00:32, 9 August 2009 (UTC)
Please take a look at his upload history, there's quite a substantial number of images he had scanned from copyrighted SBS Transit flyers and then claimed to be his own work. Just letting you know what you had missed out. -- Dave1185 ( talk) 16:37, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Re [2]. I may well be wrong, but if I understand the situation correctly then a key point for understanding him is that even where we would normally think he must be joking, he is not. Knowing (or believing) this might also help to keep expectations low. Hans Adler 23:25, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to thank you for your note welcoming me back last week. Haven't really embarked full time on editing yet, but I'm sure I'll see you when I do. Cheers, Marskell ( talk) 09:01, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
Back at FAC after a prose overhaul, 1968 Illinois earthquake could use some comments, since you always have some that I completely miss. :) ceran thor 13:28, 21 August 2009 (UTC)
is Today's featured article. Please check adds there, in particular, I am worried by addition of 10 articles by one author to "further reading". Irrelevant question, why do you revert edits saying that Big Bang is merely a theory ( Helium article)? Materialscientist ( talk) 02:58, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
Just wanted to drop you a line and let you know that I have tried to address some of the weaknesses you pointed out in your GA reassessment notes. Cheers, DickClarkMises ( talk) 17:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)
I noticed you made a change to the article above. Could you tell me why it was changed? Thanks! Vetgirl13 ( talk) 17:56, 27 August 2009 (UTC)Vetgirl13
Can you help moving the page Ljungby, Sweden to Ljungby (which now is a redirect to Ljungby (disambiguation))? See discussion at Talk:Ljungby, Sweden. Thanks. -- Skizzik talk 08:35, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
This [3] HarryAlffa ( talk) 18:59, 30 August 2009 (UTC)
You actually edited too fast for a new account. I restored your autoconfirmed status. Try not to edit with very high speed in the next day or so. Ruslik_ Zero 18:59, 4 August 2009 (UTC)
I have started a sub-thread suggesting further action here. -- Andy Walsh (talk) 21:50, 31 August 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I doubt you value these things, but I hope you'll value the message that comes along with it. You are incredibly helpful, work behind the scenes with much less recognition than you deserve, and constantly find time to help others with writing (for the most obvious example, 1968 Illinois earthquake). I wanted to thank you and I think this would be the most appropriate way. ceran thor 22:29, 31 August 2009 (UTC) |
You are pretty good at finding legal case details. At the beginning of the Dennis Gorski political career, there is a legal case that may or may not be notable. Can you check it out.-- TonyTheTiger ( t/ c/ bio/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:LOTM) 02:23, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
Ruslik, would you be able to help me further in fixing this wiki page: Baby, Come Over (This Is Our Night)? I added more info on the "False Positives" page: HERE. =D AnimatedZebra ( talk) 07:20, 1 September 2009 (UTC)
My problem has been solved now. Thankyou Ruslik! AnimatedZebra ( talk) 19:52, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello. Check this please. Dy yol ( talk) 17:57, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
Because I just had it stripped from one of my articles, even though it's been used as a source for other articles without any complaints. Serendi pod ous 18:49, 15 September 2009 (UTC)
I just restored the comments you deleted. There was not a clear personal attack there, and people had already responded to them. Please review WP:TPO for guidance on what not to do with other people's comments. Thanks. -- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 19:18, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
I'm not convinced by this closure, particularly as (1) there isn't a clear consensus there, and (2) there are still open questions. 81.110.104.91 ( talk) 08:34, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
{{
3x|a}}
= {{
loop|3|a}}
- that wasn't hard. The keep reasoning was weak, and the numbers on 2x and 3x were 2 "keep, used in examples" vs. 2 "unused and redundant", which in my view is a "delete" result. During the debate, I asked exactly where and why {{
1x}} was used, since it outputs its first parameter, unaltered, unformatted, exactly as entered, and therefore seems utterly pointless given we have conditional parameters. The discussion didn't look ready to be closed, and certainly wasn't as clear-cut as you make out. A relist would be more appropriate.
81.110.104.91 (
talk) 14:31, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
{{
loop|3|a}}
) will be meaningless. In order to learn how templates work such a person needs simple examples, which 2x and 3x templates provide. These templates are therefore useful and should be kept. "used as an example" does not make a template absolutely immune to deletion, but still is a good reason to keep it. So, I disagree that the keep reasoning was weak—it was in fact quite strong.
Ruslik_
Zero 14:42, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
I shall do, thanks. -- Île_flottante~Floating island Talk 13:27, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi, Ruslik0. In your closing summary for the Uw-spellcheck TfD, you wrote, "I think provide the best answer to the question of why this template should be deleted." Is there something missing from this sentence? I assume that there should be a username or diff link between the words "think" and "provide". Otherwise I'm not sure I understand the summary. -- RL0919 ( talk) 16:38, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rus, haven't seen you for a week or two. Hope it's all going well, I finally got a laptop. Anyway, I have two questions for you, what site do you use for scientific papers? Also, would you object to an RfA in late winter or early spring? ceran thor 23:35, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Seeing the work you did on Cat's Eye Nebula, I think that you might be able to help out on the above, which is at FAR. Cheers, Dabomb87 ( talk) 23:49, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Peer Review as to whether you feel your original comments have been dealt with, if you see any new issues with the article, and whether or not you believe the article will meet the criteria for Featured Article status. Any new comments you have would be greatly appreciated. Many thanks, Colds7ream ( talk) 16:58, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
You closed this Wikipedia:Templates for deletion/Log/2009 September 14#Template:Uw-tempabuse1 while we were still having an active discussion, see [5] To be perfectly honest, I'm tempted to DRV this one as it is not quite as cut and dry as you made it appear with your close and this is much more of a "no consensus" at the point where you closed it than a "delete 3". -- Tothwolf ( talk) 19:30, 24 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi there! I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. Recently, you reverted my fix to Miranda (moon).
If you did this because the references should be removed from the article, you have misunderstood the situation. Most likely, the article originally contained both <ref name="foo">...</ref>
and one or more <ref name="foo"/>
referring to it. Someone then removed the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
but left the <ref name="foo"/>
, which results in a big red error in the article. I replaced one of the remaining <ref name="foo"/>
with a copy of the <ref name="foo">...</ref>
; I did not re-insert the reference to where it was deleted, I just replaced one of the remaining instances. What you need to do to fix it is to make sure you remove all instances of the named reference so as to not leave any big red error.
If you reverted because I made an actual mistake, please be sure to also correct any reference errors in the page so I won't come back and make the same mistake again. Also, please post an error report at
User talk:AnomieBOT so my operator can fix me! If the error is so urgent that I need to be stopped, also post a message at
User:AnomieBOT/shutoff/OrphanReferenceFixer. Thanks!
AnomieBOT
⚡ 03:54, 25 September 2009 (UTC) If you do not wish to receive this message in the future, add {{
bots|optout=AnomieBOT-OrphanReferenceFixer}}
to your talk page.
When are you planning on taking Titania (moon) to FAC? ceran thor 17:21, 26 September 2009 (UTC)
Colds7ream ( talk) 09:39, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey Rus. Sorry about Miranda. Still plan to get going on it when I have the time, but things have been hectic. I was wondering if I could ask a physicist for help with something. I need a source to clarify this article's title. As someone at its ludicrous AfD noted, all locations are relative. I understand that from an extragalactic perspective, all positions are measured relative to the Cosmic microwave background, but I would like a source explaining that, if I'm right. Thanks. Serendi pod ous 13:17, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
A quick apology: a few minutes ago, in article Nevado del Ruiz in attempting to revert an unsubstantiated anon-IP edit, I accidentally re-introduced some vandalism that had already been removed. Sorry. And thanks for fixing my slip. The item I was attempting to fix was an unsubstantiated anon-IP change to the time of the eruption, at the start of section 'Eruption and lahars'. Could you check that, please? Thanks. Feline Hymnic ( talk) 19:27, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
I don't know. Potentially the input from anonymous editors seems to outweigh the benefit of indefinite protection. Presumably the article is closely watched my many? 74.98.43.217 ( talk) 22:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you haven't replied to my response to you on WT:CSD#Second opinion. Please consider doing so. cheers, Rd232 talk 08:05, 9 October 2009 (UTC)
It appears that you have deleted Category:Upcoming aircraft as a result of Wikipedia:Templates_for_deletion/Log/2009_July_28#Template:Future_aircraft, however, I can see no discussion on the category, and it is the incorrect venue for discussion of a category in any place. Can you please undo your deletion of the category, and if it needs to be renamed (to something like "Future aircraft") or deleted/merged, it will need to go thru the correct processes. Thanks, -- Russavia Dialogue 02:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
On yet another well-earned FA! :) Serendi pod ous 09:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Are your concerns addressed here? Are you still opposing promotion of this article? Auntieruth55 ( talk) 19:47, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello, I had a question in optics and I think you are able to answer me, please. As you know, a spherical mirror is not perfect, and does not reflect the light in one point. I want to know what about lenses? Does a spherical lens refract the light in a point? And if not, what is the perfect shape for a lens? -- Reza M. Namin ( talk) 07:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
I am thinking about bringing 1997 Qayen earthquake to FA, and I'm starting a prose rehaul. Would you mind checking for any important material I'm missing for the article? ceran thor 11:47, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Heh. Your Contributions list looks like our server closet. :-)-- SarekOfVulcan ( talk) 19:35, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
Ruslik, can you update your status on this FLC? Thanks for your reviews, Dabomb87 ( talk) 16:38, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
Hello Ruslik0,
I see what looks to me a good way to handle multiple cites to the same source in an article. See Cat's Eye Nebula where the footnotes can call out specific page numbers and use harvard ref to the citation which is only given once. I like how each part is a link and the cite is page specific.
What do you think of doing likewise in Planetary nebula?
Thanks.
WilliamKF ( talk) 22:38, 19 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi Russ,
Since you are an admin can you access the reason http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Special:Upload&wpDestFile=45_eugenia-01.jpg was deleted from en.wiki? *IF* it is the image I think it is, I would think it would qualify under Non-Commercial use/Fair Use rules. -- Kheider ( talk) 20:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Hmm...I wonder if you would change your mind about List of Earth-crossing minor planets if one of them actually hit? SpinningSpark 23:51, 31 October 2009 (UTC)
Hi, there is currently a proposal to raise the percentage of articles featured topics need to have featured to 50%, from 1 September 2010, and as someone with a topic with less than 50% of articles featured, this change if passed will directly affect you. Any input on your part to the discussion, and opinions both for and against the proposal, would be most welcome - rst20xx ( talk) 01:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. I put in a request for an edit to the mentioned template - Template talk:S-sports#Rugby Union header, similar to one you recently did for "Ultimate fighting championship". The editor that came across the editprotect doesn't seem to know what to do. Can you help? Cheers. - Sahmejil ( talk) 13:14, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello, this page has been nominated for deletion. You may be interested in participating in the discussion, located here. Thanks, Glass Cobra 18:44, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
I've been struggling with the refs for that article and was wondering if you knew of a way to make them consistent. Sorry to bother you. Serendi pod ous 15:51, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
File:Callisto field.jpg is now available on Wikimedia Commons as Commons:File:Callisto field.jpg. This is a repository of free media that can be used on all Wikimedia wikis. The image will be deleted from Wikipedia, but this doesn't mean it can't be used anymore. You can embed an image uploaded to Commons like you would an image uploaded to Wikipedia, in this case: [[File:Callisto field.jpg]]. Note that this is an automated message to inform you about the move. This bot did not copy the image itself. -- Erwin85Bot ( talk) 22:52, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
I entirely object to deletion of my wikipedia article. 43,000 views on youtube, 32,000 views on ompf.org, 2 books, 2 patents, magazine articles on me, toms hardware, etc... The claim of non-notability is ridiculous. —Preceding unsigned comment added by JonOlick ( talk • contribs) 23:37, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
Hell, people I don't know have even cited my wikipedia article as to reference of me. http://forum.beyond3d.com/archive/index.php/t-49029-p-2.html JonOlick ( talk) 23:51, 5 November 2009 (UTC)
If I'm not notable, than neither are http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Harris_(programmer) or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Ratcliff or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ciaran_Gultnieks or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_S._Harris or http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_Isaac etc.. etc.. etc... JonOlick ( talk) 00:35, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
WRT List of Map Projections, surely this is not a likely search term? Going from lower to upper case is generally where a redir is needed. -- Alan Liefting ( talk) - 20:39, 7 November 2009 (UTC)
Back on Oct 3rd, you disabled/deleted one of the edit filters (#175 for pioneer courthouse sockfarm vandalism), but I can't locate the reason (I searched the false positives reports archive and the discussions archive). Can you clarify why it was disabled? Was it because the vandal had found how to work around the filter, or were there other reasons?
If you prefer to not post the reasons here, my email address is attached to my user account. --- Barek ( talk • contribs) - 01:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
As you participated in the recent
Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two
requests for comment that relate to the use of
SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the
SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.
For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (
talk) 08:32, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
Please could I have the deletion of the EmoTrance article reviewed, as per my discussion here: [6]. Alex Charles Kent ( talk) 13:22, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:29, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
you realize you are insane. :P ceran thor 20:12, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Dear Ruslik0,
Thank you for correcting my erroneous edit to the Higgs boson page (which inserted a comment about a graviton).
Should we consider elaborating upon that point, stating something similar to the following "The Higgs boson is the only particle in the Standard Model not yet experimentally verified to exist" and then going on to say that the graviton is not a Standard Model particle?
Thanks again, and thanks for the consideration, 66.61.47.34 ( talk) 20:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi. Can you spellcheck it as people will sometimes automatically oppose people who make spelling errors on the grounds of alleged lack of attention to detail or disinterest. I hope you win YellowMonkey ( bananabucket) ( help the Invincibles Featured topic drive) 04:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
I would like to move the article Minor planet moon back to the page it came from. The move was made without a discussion. -- Kheider ( talk) 18:47, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, you moved Skinakas Basin to Skinakas (hypothetical basin), but there's a citation needed tag sitting on the statement that the basin doesn't actually exist. Do you happen to have one? I've looked around on Google a bit without success. Bryan Derksen ( talk) 21:52, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
I notice with this edit: http://en.wikipedia.org/?title=World_AIDS_Day&oldid=255363161 , you protected the World AIDS Day article after it was hit hard with vandalism on the days leading up to and during the event (Dec 1, annually).
If you review the article's history, you will notice that there is a history of this happening each and every year for the past two years, only to have the article be Protected after being vandalized.
I'm still kind of a noob here about some things. But perhaps you could pro-actively Protect or Semi-Protect the page now through Dec 2? Please advise.
38.109.88.194 ( talk) 16:42, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your suggested inputs. Give me up to one week to review through the article, as I am very busy with work as for now. In the meantime, I may drop by to reply to your suggestions and queries. Nevertheless, I look forward to working with you to improving the article. Tq! Mr Tan ( talk) 01:14, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
I need to move reptilian extraterrestrials to reptilians. Could you, please? Serendi pod ous 22:24, 23 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi Rus, I figured I'd ask before I thought of removing it myself, but in the Uranus template under the Misc. section there's links to 2060 Chiron and 15 Orionis. What's the reason for this, if you know. Nothing it either article references any ties to Uranus itself. The best I can see is that Chiron has a very chaotic orbit which brings it very close at one point to Uranus'. SkarmCA ( talk) 16:48, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Ruslik, I understand HarryAlffa was kind of following you around and pointing out your mistakes. He's been indef blocked for now by Georgewilliamherbert, and I thought you might like to know that. Good luck in the coming election (I wrote a voting guide here, if you're interested to see my comments). Best as always, ceran thor 18:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Hello Russ, can you restore this file. It has been removed from commons. -- Kheider ( talk) 06:28, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
I just wanted to wish those Wikipedians who have been nice enough to give me a barnstar or smile at me, supportive enough to agree with me, etc., a Happy Thanksgiving! Sincerely, -- A Nobody My talk 07:12, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
Russ, I was wondering if you could check the conversion at Talk:Messier_81#Brightness_Discussion before I run around the the brightest galaxies changing them from Bmag to Vmag... -- Kheider ( talk) 20:41, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
![]() |
WikiProject Vancouver | |
You have been invited to participate in Operation Schadenfreude to restore the article Vancouver back to featured article status. |
- Dear FA Team member, we could use your help if you're available. Mkdw talk 06:41, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Which dirction is African plate moving. Is it a north or east? What does it mean when a plate is moving clockwise. Is Africa platte just turning itself around or it is actually moving north. Pangaea Ultima said by 150 MYA Africa the south part will past the equator.-- 209.129.85.4 ( talk) 21:50, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
Is South American plate just moving west or it is also moving a slight north. Because Scotese's blue Palomap shows by 50 million years source number 5 on Pangaea Ultima the orange line he drawn shows South American plate is also farther north besides just west.-- 209.129.85.4 ( talk) 20:48, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to bother you (again) but I'm having trouble locating sources for the final paragraph in that section. I was hoping you might have better luck given your Uni access. Thanks. Serendi pod ous 20:56, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
I just realized you are the significant contributor on both moons proposed for a January TFA, here; do you have a preference between the two? SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 13:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello there! As an editor who has posted a comment in one of the recent Peer Reviews, GANs or FACs of International Space Station, or who has contributed to the article recently, I was wondering if you wouldn't mind commenting in the current Featured Article Candidacy with any suggestions you have for article improvements (and being bold and making those changes), whether or not you feel any issues you have previously raised have been dealt with, and, ultimately, if you believe the article meets the Featured Article guidelines. This is the fourth FAC for this article, and it'd be great to have it pass. Many thanks in advance, Colds7ream ( talk) 16:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello Ruslik0,
I'd love to get your copy edit help on the FAC for the astronomer Nicholas Mayall to which you contributed before. If you have some time, please come take a look and make any improvements you can.
Thanks.
WilliamKF ( talk) 01:40, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
Materialscientist ( talk) 12:21, 9 December 2009 (UTC)
I believe that I've fixed everything that I could from what you noted in your review, and the article is ready for another look. -- Pres N 21:45, 14 December 2009 (UTC)
Kudos on the fine article appearing today on the front page! Have a donut. Scartol • Tok 16:29, 15 December 2009 (UTC)
Over at this TfD, you decided to delete Template:Campaignbox Colorado War even though there was essentially no debate. Shouldn't it have been close as a 'no consensus' due to the fact that there was extremely limited discussion? Bsimmons666 ( talk) 01:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I voted regarding a small number of other folks, but my votes were very much in line with conventional wisdom, and were thus almost certainly irrelevant. Supporting you was really the only reason I bothered to vote at all. And I am very disappointed. • Ling.Nut 06:52, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the addition, but there now appears to be a slight contradiction in the wording of the section that I hope we can clear up. I think the implicit assumption is that Drac and its presumed cousins originated in the Oort cloud, yes? If so then we should make that clear, because the article now reads as if there are two possible sources for Halley-type comets. Thanks again. Serendi pod ous 04:52, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia talk:Community de-adminship/Draft RfC re: a 'Motion to close', which would dissolve Cda as a proposal. The motion includes an !vote. You have previously commented at Wikipedia:WikiProject Administrator/Admin Recall. Best Wishes for the Holidays, Jusdafax 05:46, 24 December 2009 (UTC)
I've made a proposal to bring the FA-Team out of inactivity—with a mission a bit different than we're used to. This is just a generic note I'm sending to members asking for their input. Cheers, Mm40 ( talk) 01:34, 28 December 2009 (UTC)
Happy new year Ruslik, and good luck with your edits here! Fotaun ( talk) 14:38, 1 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks to everyone's efforts to the GA Sweeps process, we are currently over 90% done with only 226 articles remain to be swept! As always, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. With over 50 members participating in Sweeps, that averages out to about 4 articles per person! If each member reviews an article once a week this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. At that point, awards will be handed out to reviewers. As an added incentive, if we complete over 100 articles reviewed this month, I will donate $100 to Wikipedia Forever on behalf of all GA Sweeps participants. I hope that this incentive will help to increase our motivation for completing Sweeps while supporting Wikipedia in the process. If you have any questions about reviews or Sweeps let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 ( talk • contrib) 00:16, 2 January 2010 (UTC)
...to keep this typo out of the Pluto discussion: I think you wanted to write "routine calculations", as per Wikipedia:OR#Routine_calculations. -- Stephan Schulz ( talk)
I have started a thread about your unthinking vandalism to this article. [9]
For a long time, I'm not sure what dir is Antarctic Plate moving. The article we have said it is moving to the Atlantic Ocean,or it is mivng to the Pacific Ocean. I beleive it is moving to thepacific, or it is moving counterclockwise, no showingof moving north yet, some guess is moving south, or it is moving to the southwest.-- 69.226.43.41 ( talk) 20:50, 4 January 2010 (UTC)
Part of it still can. The plate is blue part of the map. The part seperate Australia which is east half. West part of Antartica then furhter south would be unlikely. Antartica must be somewhat moving, is it likely to move east or is it more west. The plate must at least be doing something I thought.-- 69.226.34.161 ( talk) 20:48, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Hey Rusilik. I just wanted to let you know that from what I've seen I think you are a fine editor and administrator. I was disappointed that you weren't elected to the Arb Committee. In fact, I find the election outcome a bit puzzling. But perhaps I'm not up on all the politics and internal workings of the project. Take care. Happy New Year. ChildofMidnight ( talk) 21:28, 5 January 2010 (UTC)
Hello there. I wasn't aware that "not very useful" is a reason to delete, especially when bowl game navboxes are a standard part of Wikipedia articles on college football programs. The template was originally nominated because it was orphaned, which was rectified well before the discussion closed. I wonder if you might reconsider your close. Best, Mackensen (talk) 22:15, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I've requested review. Please see Wikipedia:Deletion review/Log/2009 December 30#Template:Xavier bowl games. Mackensen (talk) 15:52, 30 December 2009 (UTC)
Moving along on my circuit of Wikipedia's editing machinery, I've started a thread at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents#Xavier bowl games. Best, Mackensen (talk) 23:26, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
Best wishes for the new year! Serendi pod ous 07:00, 6 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi, when you get the chance can you revisit this? Thanks, Dabomb87 ( talk) 04:50, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ruslik0! Since you reviewed the List of National Treasures of Japan (paintings), I thought you might be interested also in List of National Treasures of Japan (shrines) which is currently a featured list candidate and in need of feedback. I'd appreciate if you have time to look over it and leave comments at the candidacy page. (The list is shorter than the painting list.) bamse ( talk) 22:22, 14 January 2010 (UTC)
After tolling up the votes in the revision proposals, it emerged that 5.4 had the most support, but elements of that support remained unclear, and various comments throughout the polls needed consideration.
A finalisation poll (intended, if possible, to be one last poll before finalising the CDA proposal) has been run to;
Hi Ruslik, I've replied to your review of The Testament of Dr. Mabuse article. Would you care to take a look at it again? Cheers! (PS: Your solar system articles are excellent!) Andrzejbanas ( talk) 14:48, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi. In looking through our latest WP:CCI, I discovered that the contents of the article Alleged fabrication of the Nanking Massacre were merged without attribution into Nanking Massacre controversy and denial, here, with a bit more having been added with attribution [10]. We need the history of the article to attribute that text, particularly as some of it is still published there. It's a beast, however, so I don't think it's a good idea to do a history merge: we will never again tease out who said what where and when. :) I'd like to propose in the alternative resurrecting it, blanking it (with a note) and making it a subpage of the talk (since subpages aren't permitted in article space), with a note at the main article talk pointing to it for attribution. Before doing so, I wanted to check with you and see if you had any objection. I expect not, since it's simply for the history, but there may be factors of which I'm unaware. I'll check back. Thanks. -- Moonriddengirl (talk) 18:03, 15 January 2010 (UTC)
As an administrator, do you think it's proper to give confirmed status to brand new users who're tripping the edit filter while making wholly legitimate edits? This is a general question, not specifically related to any of the recent false positive reports. -- Soap Talk/ Contributions 20:55, 22 January 2010 (UTC)
The articles Battle of the Nile and Order of battle at the Battle of the Nile have both now passed their respective FAC and FLC, and as many of the points raised in these processes were applicable to both articles I wanted to thank you for your assisance and support. Regards-- Jackyd101 ( talk) 18:06, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Though of course I couldn't have done it without you. I'll give Moons of Saturn a copyedit. I really only have two more articles that I think are within my capabilities: Miranda, which I promised I would do, and Discovery of Neptune, which must be completed, even though it will be murderously difficult. With those, and perhaps some of the remaining five Saturn moon articles, I think my Wikipedia jaunt will be finished, as I don't think there are any more articles that I can do. Serendi pod ous 20:05, 26 January 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ruslik0, I was wondering why you closed Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Northwestern University Dance Marathon with a result of keep. The users were evenly divided, so I don't think there was a consensus one way or the other.
Also, while only a fool would disagree with you that the "Chicago Sun-Times is a good source," WP:CLUB indicates: "Organizations whose activities are local in scope may be notable where there is verifiable information from reliable independent sources outside the organization's local area. Where coverage is only local in scope, the organization may be included as a section in an article on the organization's local area instead." The Sun Times is the local area's paper in this case. OCNative ( talk) 07:16, 27 January 2010 (UTC)
I'm confused how Category:Intra-Palestinian Violence was deleted without consultation of those editors that I actually worked on created that category. And beyond that, intra-Palestinian fighting is not simply relegated to the Fatah-Hamas conflict. In the First Intifada Palestinians killed approximately 1,000 other Palestinians they deemed to be "collaborators." And currently in the Gaza Strip, Hamas and al-Qaeda inspired jihadists groups are fighting each other. Hence, I have recreated the page, which I apologize if it is a terrible breach of protocol-- but I still thought with any sort of deletion on this level the main editors/creator would be consulted. Plot Spoiler ( talk) 17:45, 30 January 2010 (UTC)
![]() |
Like a Box of Chocolates... | |
... your contributions at Wikipedia:Featured Article Candidates during the month of January 2010 are greatly appreciated. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:35, 31 January 2010 (UTC) |
re: Earth's location in the universe. Someone posted on the talkpage asking for information vis a vis the "isotropic/homogeneous universe" thing but I didn't feel qualified to expand it. Do you think you could add a paragraph to the lead? Thanks. Serendi pod ous 00:53, 1 February 2010 (UTC)
Hi Ruslik- I saw your deletion and restoration of the Henry II of England article, and am just curious about what happened. Are there special circumstances when admins wipe out vandalism history? Thanks. Eric talk 19:56, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of Northwestern University Dance Marathon. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. OCNative ( talk) 03:30, 3 February 2010 (UTC)
Because of unexpectedly high work load, I won't be able to maintain the 500/mo edit rate that I've been at since about October of 2008. In particular there'll be some days where I'll be away from early morning to late evening. The reason I mention this here is because for the past three months I've been trying to get responses to the submissions on the False positives page as quickly as possible, and won't be able to do that for the time being. Since you've been active there for a long time and have done some great things in response to glitches in the filter I'd appreciate if you could help fill the gap I'm leaving, especially during weekdays; however I assure you I will still check the page at least once per day even so. -- Soap Talk/ Contributions 18:18, 4 February 2010 (UTC)