User:LuciferMorgan/Archive 5

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Archive This 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.
← Archive 4 |
Archive 5
| Archive 6 →

Contents

Macca

Kingboyk, and LessHeardvanU did some great work on it, and I have to look through it in the cold light of day. Sorry to hear about your troubles with another editor, but I was warned yesterday (for the very first time) for telling the truth (Ouch!) You have my support. --andreasegde 23:08, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

recent conflict

I do hope that you return soon. Tony 01:01, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

If he does, I'll be the first to complain. But best if he can just be encouraged to chill off and stop interfering with the process. Then we can do the real work. (He seems to have become more aggressive over the past six months—not good.) Tony 01:08, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Oh! Man! I have a test at 8 am tomorrow! If I can be of any help later, let me know. But here's a thought — I saw Kirill Lokshin's name in the early section of the page (didn't read the whole thing, sorry! Will tomorrow!). He seems to be the patron saint of sanity, to me at least...
I put a link to that page on Homestarmy's page. Hope that's OK.
Besides, it seems you have more than a little support already. But go a little easy, eh?
--Ling.Nut 01:11, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I agree; it's hard to go easy in the thick of it, but this little storm will pass and we'll all return to the important thing: raising the quality! Concerning "was to/would": was it ALoan who called this the "back-slung conditional"? While not wrong, it can become tiresome in a narrative-based article (history- and story-based). I discourage it. Tony 02:02, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
I replied on my talk page. It may not be what you want to hear. :-(
--Ling.Nut 02:06, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

(undent). Once again, on my page. But maybe... maybe some separation between you and him, in both time and space... for a brief while.. might be a good idea... I dunno. It might be a good thing to let a few suns go up and down on this problem. Just my opinion. --Ling.Nut 03:03, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Megadeth

Next I'm going for Iron Maiden, with some Slayer on the side. They keep putting up Slayer for GA, but it needs a lot of work, so I am adding some stuff to help it along. Skeletor2112 05:10, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I think Maiden is much closer to reaching FA status again than the 'Deth page ever was, so it shouldn't take so long. I also have "Run to the Hills" by Mick Wall, I'll have to break out again, that thing was pretty comprehensive, especially for the older stuff. Skeletor2112 05:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Yeah, I forgot they re-released that book, I have the 1998 edition, I'll have to check exactly when I get home later. Other than page numbers, is there any content difference? I assume they added stuff from 1998 on. Skeletor2112 05:29, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, regarding your note about lead paragraph cite's on Megadeth's FAC page, even mention of the band's style and sales shouldn't be cited? Looking at Rush (band) and Pink Floyd, I see some cites, should I just remove the general cites, or all of them? Skeletor2112 06:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Battle of Little Bighorn

I am working to restore the article's GA rating by adding in sources, footnotes, etc. Much more work to go, but at least the effort is underway. Scott Mingus 12:09, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

two hours' sleep...

I got two hours' sleep last night, but got the cr*ppy paper done. Hope things are going well. --Ling.Nut 01:47, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

TMNT 2

Hi LuciferMorgan, I reworked the last paragraph in the (Reception) section. I did not really write much of the article, just added a lot of references and so on. That section was kind of opinionated and un-referenced. I shortened it and added a reference.Thanks:)Davey4

Graniteville train disaster

The name on the GA Pass rings a bell... from similar contexts, perhaps..?--Ling.Nut 22:17, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

  1. Research: ask Homey if the rule about editor's can't pass their own article existed at that time.
  2. Research: then comb thru the hist of WP:GAC looking for similar examples.
  3. I dunno where you would report this. There may not even be a place; it is simply a violation of WP:GAC guidelines. I dunno if it's a violation of Wikipedia guidelines. Probably not! Ask Homey.
--Ling.Nut 22:38, 9 December 2006 (UTC)
Bourbonnais train accident is still a GA; I'm saying I believe we have delisted other articles for the same reason that were passed by the same person.--Ling.Nut 22:41, 9 December 2006 (UTC)

Hello

Hi, i recently requested a review on Slayer from an experienced wikipedian and she said it required a copyedit by some fresh eyes. I was hoping if you have some spare time you could go over the article and point out any grammar errors and such or direct me to someone else who could do so. Thank you :) M3tal H3ad 13:03, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

Algoma Central Railway

You forgot to leave a [[[WP:GA/R]]notification on the article's talk page... --Ling.Nut 20:50, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

te — di — um

It is getting rather tedious. But frankly I think the arguing is just gonna continue, until we start passing out free GAs. That's what the people want. :-) --Ling.Nut 23:33, 10 December 2006 (UTC)

NPOV on a Boyscout page? Nobody has any beefs with Boy Scouts except for the whole homosexuality thing, and that is not relevant to an article about an individual group or pack or whatever (though it would be relevant to an article about Boy Scouts as a whole). My two cents. --Ling.Nut 00:01, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Macca

Thanks a lot for keeping a watch on the McCartney article. You always make very concise points, which really help a lot. Respect is due... --andreasegde 00:29, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

RFC

Slambo's comment looked eminently reasonable. Perhaps you should retract your RFC (if you haven't already). --Ling.Nut 00:49, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Re: Megadeth is an FA

Holy shit - that is awesome! And before I could even fix the images... I couldn't have done it without you dude, thanks a million for all the help & guidance. Now Maiden is next! \m/ Skeletor2112 05:22, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Cool, I will begin on the Maiden revamp this week. I know what you mean about "unhelpful edits" that slow up the process. It was almost good that no one really cared about the Megadeth article when I started, I didn't have much trouble there with counter productive edits (as is the case with ceritan other metal band pages right now..) As far as the US flag in the Megadeth infobox, I was just following the lead of other band articles I saw at the time. I don't really have a preference either way, tho - so if you prefer, feel free to ditch it.
Maiden tonight, huh? Fuckin awesome! I was out of town and missed this tour, I really wanted to see them play the new stuff (I hear they do all or almost all of the new album live), like "For the Greater Good of God" and "The Legacy" - brilliant stuff. I was lucky enough to be front row at the Universal Ampitheater show in LA with Dio, and Tribe of Gypsies (Roy Z's band) opening, back in on the Virtual XI tour. Yeah yeah I know, everyone but me hates Blaze Bayley, but I like those albums, The X Factor especially. Best show of my life, got one of 'Arry's wristbands - maybe my most prized possesion the world, as Steve Harris is God in my book. Enjoy the show! \m/ Skeletor2112 09:52, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

delisting

Before delisting an article, don't forget to leave a message on the article's talk page, then wait for a while. I suggest at least one day. --Ling.Nut 22:51, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Macca, again

We need your vote on Macca's talk page about which section to fork. (1,000 words less and we have it in the bag...) --andreasegde 05:06, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Jenna Jameson

I rewrote some of the listy bits - do you have a moment to see if it's better, or needs more work? Thanks for your help! AnonEMouse (squeak) 15:51, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

In-Line Citations

Re the "Chepstow Bridge" article, by "In-Line Citations", do you mean a tag in the text, 1, 2 etc, referencing the specific book or article referrred to? Peter Maggs 06:54, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

GA backlog

I won't be doing anything for at least a week and perhaps a month, depending on how busy I get. Besides, physics/math etc. May be a special case. But I will definitely get around to all this. --Ling.Nut 16:52, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

Lennon

A suggestion has been made on the John Lennon talk page about how much information should go in. It would be nice of you to add a comment, if you wish to... --andreasegde 14:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I didn't quite understand your forking comment. --andreasegde 15:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC)
Right - got it now. I think I will trim the paragraph down a bit, and move some of it (such as her claim that she was raped) to her article. Thanks, as always. --andreasegde 15:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)


The Beatles: I thnak you very kindly, LuciferMorgan. "My cup floweth over", as they say. Your advice has been of immense use to me over the past few months, and I thank you in return. What nice people there are on The Beatles pages. --andreasegde 20:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Prince lyric links

FYI, I reported User:MistaTee for copyright violation check at Wikipedia:Copyright problems/2006 December 17/Articles. It looks like MistaTee runs dtt-lyrics.com and is trying to preserve links to his site against Wikipedia policy. I saw that you had removed the links and were reverted. Mike Dillon 16:37, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

I noticed the other links to the site. I'm assuming that if the links to dtt-lyrics.com are found unacceptable (and really any other lyrics site that doesn't have the copyright holder's permission), then all 147 articles will be purged of the links. I'm not sure I agree that linking to song lyrics from an article about the song is in itself unencyclopedic, assuming the link doesn't have copyright issues. I believe it falls within the guidelines of Wikipedia:External links (haven't looked at the less official guidelines for songs for Wikipedia:WikiProject Songs). Mike Dillon 22:40, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Impact wrench spam

Several people were insisting the article needed more references... Those links were the only references I could find! Reference material on impact wrenches seems hard to come by, with the commercial sites being about the only source of information out there (see discussions on the article's talk page and my talk page for more on the searching proccess). So now it doesn't have any commercial links, but it doesn't have references either! What do you propose be done? You said embedded links shouldn't point to commercial sites, maybe rather than deleting them you could cite-ify them instead? I'm not sure how to do that... Thanks, Bushytails 17:49, 17 December 2006 (UTC).

"warned by Agne"

Hi,

I processed Agne's contribs and came up with what I believe to be all the articles that she warned, and that are still GAs. I have already delisted 9 or 10 of them and have not yet removed them from my "Agne page."

Be careful if you use this page to look for problem articles. Some of them may not still be GAs; also some of them have clearly improved since Agne warned them. Here ya go:

User:Ling.Nut/rere

Later --Ling.Nut 21:31, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Be careful with that list, Lucifer - you might not want to fall into that mess. Agne was right about citing, and was on the right track in her efforts to get articles referenced, but if you follow in her tracks, you're likely to have your head bitten off by some science editors after the debacle that ensued over her posting of those warnings. For GA - which is a relative, subjective process anyway - it might not be worth getting a lot of editors mad at you, since hardly anyone pays attention to GA. Best, Sandy (Talk) 21:50, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
Yes, be careful. If avoiding being scolded by people who should know better is more important than Wikipedia, avoid at all costs trying to ask people to follow WP:V.
By the way, I came here to also warn you to be careful to check that Agne actually warned an article on the list before you delist it. I may have made a mistake in processing Agne's contribs. I don't think so, but always best to double-check. --Ling.Nut 22:02, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

Merry Christmas!

Hope you have a good one! Best wishes, Vera, Chuck & Dave 12:24, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Titanium

Additional work since your vote - can you revisit? Wikipedia:Featured article review/Titanium Regards, Sandy (Talk) 01:28, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Graniteville train disaster

Hey, I just accidentally saw your comments on Homey's talk page about the fact that I archived Graniteville train disaster as "No Consensus." It was sometimes difficult for me to count votes; some people don't say clearly what they vote etc. And I think it looked like less than a supermajority to me as I was eyeballing it. But if I was wrong, then sorry. Cheers, --Ling.Nut 22:32, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

You don't need a supermajority - also, it didn't even need to go to GAR and could've been failed straight away. LuciferMorgan 22:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
Mmmm. OK. I just did what seemed correct. Perhaps I was wrong. Wouldn't be the first or last time. Anyhow, Later. --Ling.Nut 22:45, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
It's ok - the bottom line was the article had 0 cites, a clear cut case. Take care. LuciferMorgan 22:46, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

The Beatles and forking articles

I have a problem that I would like to impart to all you good 'Beatles project' editors, and it is this:

  • Should anything directly Beatles-related be in the main Beatles' article, and only 'personal' stuff put into the Lennon, McCartney, Harrison, and Starr articles? I have the disturbing feeling that I'm repeating stuff in both Lennon and McCartney articles that should only be in the main article.
  • But... if only personal stuff is included in the individual Beatles' articles, would it make them too confusing/random, to read?

Please answer (on a stamped and self-addressed postcard please) on our talk page. (This might be more interesting than talking about MBEs... :) andreasegde, Mr Hornby, and Sir Sean de Garde 15:21, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the note on my talk page and nominating The Cat and the Canary (1927 film) for GA status. It was promoted as a GA today and appeared on the Main Page in the Did You Know? column. Dmoon1 22:54, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

re:Freaks

I've got the Stephen King book, but other than that I haven't begun researching this article at all. I'm gonna have to rewatch it to remember the plot as well. Thanks for your support at FA, BTW. Dmoon1 14:43, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Re:Christ Illusion

Good luck with it, do you plan on getting it to GA or FA or just a general expansion? M3tal H3ad 05:26, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Very nice work, its pretty dam big now heaps of info i didn't even know about. I can help out if you want, although some editors like being left alone, otherwise good-luck with it. M3tal H3ad 01:49, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Christ illusion

Hi, I went through down to and including "six". It's very hard going in the edit box with those dense, long inline references. I'd like to know up top why it's musically/historically important and/or distinctive, in the lead. They'll complain about the choppy paragraphing. Some of the sections need filling out. Tony 11:03, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Stubby paragraphs, lots of them, will be shot down at FAC. More meat, and greater smoothness/flow are required in many sections. If it's not musically or historically important, promotion will be harder, I guess.

Tyler (User:Deckiller) is very good at this type of thing. Tony 11:40, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Something strange

Hi, sorry to bother you, but I am trying to do some of Sandy's work on FAR while she's away, and I found something strange. This article: Wikipedia:Featured article review/British East India Company is gone from the list on the FAR page. I don't know how that happened and can't figure out how to make it show up again. Can you help? Jeffpw 17:56, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Just manually re-added it. Hope that's ok. Thanks. Jeffpw 18:00, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

FAR question

Can just anybody remove articles from FAR? Or only people who have been actively participating in the process? I ask because three have been either removed as FAs or passed FAR in the last hour by a user I am unfamiliar with. Sorry to bother you with this, but I am unsure of the protocols. Jeffpw 17:50, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

  • I've messaged Marskell about this, but he is offline, apparently.. That contributer has now removed another one, making it 4. My concern is that at least one was still under discussion and unresolved, and the others have been removed, but bot all steps have been followed (forgetting to remove the featured star, forgetting to delist at featured articles, etc). I cleaned up what he didn't do and messaged him; his reply was that he was learning how to delist. I suggested he discuss before he does anymmore, but he hasn't listened. I mean, the minimum time at FARC is two weeks, and it seems he is delisting everything that is exactly 2 weeks or longer. I am also relatively new to FAR, so I don't know all of the procedures. This just seems a bit off to me. Jeffpw 19:20, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Re: Gary Oldman IP vandal

Thanks for your heads up on continued vandalism in this article. I have reported the IP to WP:AIV for an admin to intervene. I assume you thought I was an admin which is why you asked me to block the IP... If that assumption is wrong, then it might assist you the future to know that any user of Wikipedia may report an IP vandal or Wikipedia user vandal to this page. Later... KatalavenoTC 04:21, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Orphaned fair use image (Image:3_first_singles.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:3_first_singles.jpg. I notice the 'image' page currently specifies that the image is unlicensed for use on Wikipedia and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable under fair use (see our fair use policy).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that any fair use images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BigDT 19:44, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Marilyn Manson (band) FAR

It wopuld surprise me if that was the sole reason. I was just poking through the history and saw he was aware since mid October that FAR was a possibility. From his edit history, it seems Manson was his main source of interest at Wikipedia. If he left because of this, he certainly had lots of time to improve the citations. By the way, am I now a member of the "Goon Squad"? I thought working at FAR was a positive thing, so it's interesting to see how (some) members of the community feel about it. On a related note, sorry if I came on strong to Voyager. I was already frustrated because he left the FAR tag on the article itself, and not the talk page, and didn't notify anybody of his actions. I realize notification is optional, but it is good form. So I just got a bit crabby when he said himself that his issues with the article were a matter of 6 sentences. Jeffpw 19:48, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

  • Okies. I did message them, however, and offered to help them insert a reference if they had one and didn't know how.:-) Jeffpw 22:00, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../l/u/c/User%7ELuciferMorgan_Archive_5_6dec.html"