User talk:JMiall

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 Welcome! 1.1 Additional tips 1.2 Happy Wiki-ing. 2 Image copyright problem with Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg 3 Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot 4 Category Link Trick 5 Andy Morrell and Gary McSheffrey 6 Thank you! 7 Thanks 8 Thanks for your peer review for Komodo Dragon 9 M62 motorway 10 List of notable residents of Stockport 11 Hesselberg article 12 A.F.C. Wimbledon 13 Wikipedia:Peer review/Rei/Cross-dressing, sexuality, and gender identity of Joan of Arc/archive1 13.1 Table 14 Informal peer review Boeing 747 15 William Astle 16 Neilston 17 Usage of Example.jpg 18 Peer Review request 19 Hendrik Wade Bode review request 20 Requesting peer review of Facebook 21 Oil shale and Oil shale extraction 22 Peer review idea 23 Requesting peer review of PHP 24 Fair use rationale for Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg 25 Wikipedia:Peer review/Facebook/archive3 26 Peer review/Copyedit 27 Copyediting help 28 Request for Peer Review help

[edit] Welcome!

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg

Thanks for uploading Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg. However, the image may soon be deleted unless we can determine the copyright holder and copyright status. The Wikimedia Foundation is very careful about the images included in Wikipedia because of copyright law (see Wikipedia's Copyright policy).

The copyright holder is usually the creator, the creator's employer, or the last person who was transferred ownership rights. Copyright information on images on Wikipedia is signified using copyright templates. The three basic license types on Wikipedia are open content, public domain, and fair use. Find the appropriate template in Wikipedia:Image copyright tags and place it on the image page like this: {{TemplateName}}.

Please signify the copyright information on any other images you have uploaded or will upload. Remember that images without this important information can be deleted by an administrator. You can get help on image copyright tagging from Wikipedia talk:Image copyright tags. -- Carnildo 15:48, 1 February 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

Stubs Berrylands Parliamentary borough Orkney (Scottish Parliament constituency) Woodley, Stockport West Lancashire (UK Parliament constituency) Leyton and Wanstead Richmond Park (UK Parliament constituency) The Magic Flute Weaver Vale (UK Parliament constituency) Chris Foote Wood Ben Wallace (UK politician) Congleton (UK Parliament constituency) Thunderpants Olympique Lyonnais Warrington North (UK Parliament constituency) Western Isles (Scottish Parliament constituency) Mid Down (UK Parliament constituency) Dulwich and West Norwood (UK Parliament constituency) Twickenham (UK Parliament constituency)

Cleanup Constitutional convention (political custom) Stamford High School Andrew Leslie, 5th Earl of Rothes Merge Rotating black hole Lamarckism Ayr (Scottish Parliament constituency) Add Sources Regent's Park and Kensington North (UK Parliament constituency) New England Party Tory Wikify Football in England National Congress (Sudan) Dear Sudan Expand Metal-rich Voyager 2 German Revolution

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.

P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot 18:13, 18 April 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Category Link Trick

Thanks for the heads-up on the category thing. So, adding a preceding colon to a category wikilink gives you the link without being put in the category? That's handy. Where'd ya learn that trick? — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 23:27, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Only by making the same mistake myself and checking how the people linking to those pages successfully were doing it, nowt clever. JMiall 23:30, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

Well, good to know. I'll have to add that to my "clever Wikipedia tricks" notes. — WCityMike (talk • contribs) 23:45, 27 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Andy Morrell and Gary McSheffrey

First have you seen either of these play? If so you would not doubt that Andy Morrell alleges to be a professional footballer and Gary McSheffrey is greedy. I will however find an article to back up this greed as I know there are plenty kicking around. Asmith6 13:10, 9 June 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thank you!

Hi JMiall, thanks for all your comments on the Gilberto Silva article. It's going to take me some time to address all your suggestions - so I'll get started straight away. The only thing I'm uncertain of now is this: how many book references do you think are needed in an article of this size? At the moment there are only two, but I'm pretty sure this isn't enough (especially as there are over forty web references). Guidelines which I've read have only ever said "include print references" - but never how many. What do you think?

Anyway - just that question for now. I'm sure that once I've implemented your suggestions, the article will be much better; so thank you!

All the best, GilbertoSilvaFan 21:21, 6 October 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks

Thanks for the tip re the preview button - I think somehow I overlooked that. One question though - what helps you decide when you feel a location or item deserves a separate page ? Strider52 | Talk 12:02, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the advice - I think I'm going to have to do a lot more reading up before I start writing. Wikepdia just feels so big!! Strider52 | Talk 20:20, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks for your peer review for Komodo Dragon

Thanks, but I couldn't find what the "organ on the roof of the mouth" was. I believe it's a Jacobson's organ, but my source didn't say. bibliomaniac15 22:31, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

[edit] M62 motorway

I've done all your points you listed at this review. Will ^{(We're flying the flag all over the world)} 01:44, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I've got the images from Geograph, which licence them under {{cc-by-sa-2.0}}. Will ^{(We're flying the flag all over the world)} 13:14, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

[edit] List of notable residents of Stockport

It appears I edited without consideration, for which I apologise. Please feel free to revert the changes. - Tiswas^(t) 22:17, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hesselberg article

Hello! I found you on the WikiProject Mountains page and just wanted to ask, if you are interested in having a look (and improving) the Hesselberg article. Keep on good work! Tirkfl 09:41, 8 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for proofreading this article! I am going to look through your questions and tell you as soon as I answered most of them. Tirkfl 07:31, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

I answered all of your questions. I hope I could clarify some issues. I had some translation problems too, which I posted at Talk:Hesselberg. Again, thank you very much for proofreading and maybe we can further improve this article. -- Tirkfl^talk 11:50, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello! I had a closer look on the article again, changed the spelling to BE, and corrected some typos. I also corrected some of the issues that you have posted at Wikipedia:Translation/Hesselberg. Please could you look through one more time, four eyes are seeing more than two... Thank you in advance for taking the time, Tirkfl^talk 13:51, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

		The Special Barnstar
		I award You the Special Barnstar for taking the time and proofreading the Hesselberg article. Tirkfl 12:27, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] A.F.C. Wimbledon

Do you think i should put it in for a class or does it still need some more work. --Sunderland06 23:48, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Added lots of citations for scores and league postitions. --Sunderland06 21:11, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

1. Y cited the 2nd paragraph of the foundation section
2. Y cited 'completely alien to the traditions of the game in England'
3. could not find citation the 2nd paragraph of the Ground purchase section
4. could not find citation The 'Why AFC' section, particularly the quote

--Sunderland06 17:37, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Rei/Cross-dressing, sexuality, and gender identity of Joan of Arc/archive1

Thanks for the feedback! If you don't mind, I replied to your comment seeking your opinion on a couple of issues you brought up. -- Rei 23:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Table

Thanks for adjusting the table at Gerlachovsky stit. Carca220nne (talk) 15:47, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

A great, spiffy table. Thank you very much. Carca220nne (talk) 13:59, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Hiking — The Park bylaws say that with the UIAA card, you're allowed to depart from a marked trail along the shortest approach route to the rock you want to climb. It's not quite so easy for them to be as restrictive when you have the card (but they can, the Park management often phrases its comments about visitors the way the police would comment on likely or actual criminals). For instance, no rule prevents an UIAA cardholder from taking a hikers' route to the top of a mountain in order take a more technical route down (which may then need to be abandoned for various reasons), but see above. I'd expect a good deal of snow and ice in May, but the main obstacle would be that the Park regulations don't allow anyone, card or not, even on the marked trails past several mountain chalets, meaning past the Sliezsky Dom Hotel in this instance, from Nov. 1 till June 15 each year. Carca220nne (talk) 18:43, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Informal peer review Boeing 747

Would you consider looking over the Boeing 747 article. I'm working with some other nice editors rewriting it. The first revision is nearing completion (except one section) and then we'll clean up the format of the reference. If you look at it, it need not be a formal peer review, just an informal opinion. I'm contacting two people, one of them you. We (at least me) are looking at just ideas for improvement, not necessarily GA or FA. Thank you. Archtransit (talk) 17:00, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

Since this is not a formal peer review, I didn't put the tags on the talk page. You can let me know on my talk page or whereever you want. Archtransit (talk) 17:02, 10 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] William Astle

FYI, William Astle was the editor of the Stockport Advertiser, and also of the Stockport Advertiser Centenary History of Stockport, see the title page here. The IP's contributions suggest that he was reading the history at the time of his posting. Regards, Mr Stephen (talk) 09:53, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Neilston

Hello, I believe (from this list you are a volunteer for peer reviewing articles about settlements?

I wondered if you'd be interested in taking a breif look at Wikipedia:Peer review/Neilston/archive1 and give me some feedback. Hope you can help. No problem if not, -- Jza84 · (talk) 02:37, 14 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Usage of Example.jpg

Hi there. Generally speaking, it's both easier and more efficient to use Example.png in this situation - plus it tends to get picked up less often by vandalism filters and such when it is used in place of Example.jpg. A particular robot which moved non-free images from both mainspace and Userspace was accidentally programmed to add the example.jpg to replace the non-free image rather than the example.png image as would have been the initial intention.

The original image you had used was apparently tagged as non-free, and thus was being targeted by the ImageBacklogBot - in actual fact it took me several days to work this out before I realized this was the case - I was curious as to why so many Examples of the example.jpg image had been added so quickly, particularly in Userspace.

As a compromise, I have reverted back to your version of the page, but using Image:Example.png instead of Example.jpg, if this is acceptable with you. Please contact me back if you wish. All the best. Bobo. 22:54, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Peer Review request

Hello. I wonder if I might ask you to take a look at Crawley and its peer review request at Wikipedia:Peer_review/Crawley/archive1. As you can see, Hassocks5489 spent quite a lot of time working on it over the summer, and we're now thinking of moving for FA status. Any tips would be most welcome. Thanks Tafkam (talk) 22:10, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello! I stumbled upon Wikipedia:Peer_review/Crawley/archive1 and read that you wondered if there was some sort of 'standard' for weatherbox background colours. The colours used in Template:Infobox weather and of some weatherboxes like the ones in Crawley and Weymouth were developed a while back, when we were finding a way of having them automatically used in Template:Infobox weather. There are by no means standard or official, but are used in many weatherboxes, as you can compare between articles more easily. They can be found at User:Rossenglish/Weatherbox if you're still interested in them =) Ross^English 14:53, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

No problem. When you said about other weather data, I realised that the 'rain days' column could be used for any variable, so I generalised it (it hasn't been added to the template, but I've used it in some articles). I've taken a look at the Gerlachovský štít table, and the 'days with' and air temperature rows are now covered by User:Rossenglish/Weatherbox, and so is the precipitation row, except for the months with 19 cm (190 mm) of rain. The issue of high rainfall arose when deciding colours for Template:Infobox weather: the large range of precipitation for extreme climates would have stretched the colours too thinly, so we left it at 0 to 150 mm. If you do want to use Template:Infobox weather's colour scheme, for the 19 cm months, you could use #000032 and white font. I might see if I can extend the rainfall a bit, but there are only a few distinct colours left between navy and black =) Ross^English 19:30, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Hendrik Wade Bode review request

Hi, I saw your name as a review volunteer. Is it possible to review Hendrik Wade Bode? I have set it up here. Thanks, Dr.K. (talk) 18:19, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your fast reply and for offering to review the article. Please feel free to start at anytime. There is no hurry at all. I am indebted. Thanks again. Dr.K. (talk) 02:40, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting peer review of Facebook

I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Wikipedia:Peer review/Facebook/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 18:37, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Facebook is currently nominated for a WP:GA at Wikipedia:Good article nominations#Computing, so if you have time, please review it. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:02, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oil shale and Oil shale extraction

Hi, JMiall. I am going to nominate the Oil shale and Oil shale extraction articles for FAC. As the last peer reviews of these articles were not very productive, I wonder if you agree to take a look and give some advice and hard critics before proceeding with the FAC nomination? Thank you in advance. Beagel (talk) 19:49, 15 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi, JMiall. Thank you very much for reviewing the Oil shale article. It achieved FA status and your review was a great help in this process. I would like to ask also reviewing the Oil shale extraction article. Thank you. Beagel (talk) 19:15, 30 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review idea

Hi, I have made a proposal that no peer review request be archived without some response. To aid in this, there is a new list of PR requests at least one week old that have had no repsonses beyond a semi-automated peer review. This list is at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog.

There are just over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, so I figure if each of these volunteers reviewed just one or two PR requests without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog (as there have been 2 or 3 such unanswered requests a day on average).

If you would be able to help out with a review or two a month from the "no responses" backlog list that would be great (and much appreciated). Please discuss questions, comments, or ideas at the PR talk page and thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 00:15, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Requesting peer review of PHP

I noticed that you listed yourself as a volunteer for "Applied sciences and technology" subjects for peer review. I am requesting a peer review from you for Wikipedia:Peer review/PHP/archive2, if you have the time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 21:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg

Thanks for uploading or contributing to Image:Milford_Everton_FC.jpg. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use. Suggestions on how to do so can be found here.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If you have uploaded other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on those pages too. 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 non-free media lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Do you want to opt out of receiving this notice? Rettetast (talk) 19:35, 19 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review/Facebook/archive3

Hi, you peer reviewed Facebook a few weeks ago. If you have time, could you please take a second look at the article as it is now and post some comments at the peer review? Please let us know if the comments you posted last time have been addressed or not. I would like to bring the article to FAC soon, so any copyediting help would also be greatly appreciated. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:05, 4 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review/Copyedit

Hello. I'm looking for a copyedit/peer review on the solar energy page and your name came recommended by Beagel. I'd appreciate any and all help. Mrshaba (talk) 20:49, 9 May 2008 (UTC)

That sounds good to me. Thanks. Mrshaba (talk) 16:28, 10 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for your initial take. I can't get too defensive about the intro because I've avoided working on it for the most part. It will need several more iterations. The Greeks, Chinese and Pueblo thing got picked up in a paper shortly after I wrote it so it has sorta stuck. It seemed to strike a cord so to speak. I've replied to your initial comment on the talk page. Click Me Mrshaba (talk) 06:14, 15 May 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the very specific follow up comments. One question, where should the discussion take place regarding the peer reviewer comments? Here? I also see some replies on the main peer review page? I've been moving them to the main talk page but this now seems incorrect? Mrshaba (talk) 17:15, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. Thanks for the review and info. Mrshaba (talk) 18:39, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copyediting help

Hi, I noticed you offering your services in the Peer Review group for Electrical Engineering-related stuff. I was wondering if you'd mind having a go at Madman Muntz which I have up for FA review? The actual technical stuff isn't substantial, but figured it wouldn't hurt to have someone go over it anyway. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 00:17, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

No problem, not a big deal. If you get a chance next week or whenever, feel free to stop over and have a look. If not, no worries and thanks for letting me know. Nobody of Consequence (talk) 19:52, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Request for Peer Review help

Thank you for you work as a peer review volunteer. Since March, there has been a concerted effort to make sure all peer review requests get some response. Requests that have gone three days or longer without a substantial response are listed at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I have three requests to help this continue.

1) If you are asked to do a peer review, please ask the person who made the request to also do a review, preferably of a request that has not yet had feedback. This is fairly simple, but helps. For example when I review requests on the backlog list, I close with Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, ...

2) While there are several people who help with the backlog, lately I have been doing up to 3 or 4 peer reviews a day and can not keep this up much longer. We need help. Since there are now well over 100 names on the PR volunteers page, if each volunteer reviewed just one PR request without a response from the list each month, it would easily take care of the "no response" backlog. To help spread out the load, I suggest those willing pick a day of the month and do a review that day (for example, my first edit was on the 8th, so I could pick the 8th). Please pick a peer review request with no responses yet, if possible off the backlog list. If you want, leave a note on my talk page as to which day you picked and I will remind you each month.

3) I have made some proposals to add some limits to peer review requests at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits. The idea is to prevent any one user from overly burdening the process. These seem fairly reasonable (one PR request per editor per day, only four total PR requests per editor at a time, PR requests with cleanup banners can be delisted (like GAN quick fail), and wait two weeks to relist a PR request after it is archived), but have gotten no feedback in one week. If you have any thoughts on these, please weigh in.

Thanks again for your help and in advance for any assistance with the backlog. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)