User talk:Karanacs

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Karanacs is taking a short wikibreak and will likely be offline until Monday, June 16.

In an effort to keep conversations together, I will likely respond on this page if you begin a conversation here. If I've begun a conversation on your talk page, I'll watchlist that page until you respond.
Note: I usually hide from Wikipedia on weekends, so if you leave a message on the weekend you will likely not get a response until Mondays.

[edit] Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:57, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RFA

Well, I've set it up... Feel free to let me know if there are any changes you'd like me to make to the nomination statement. When you're ready, follow the instructions here; it will run for seven days from the moment you send it live. It would probably be a good idea to read the current RFAs to see what sort of things people are looking for in the answers.

One thing I will say is, don't panic if the "opposes" shoot up when you first send it live! Whatever enemies you've made will have had the redlinked RFA watchlisted, and will jump in to oppose the moment it goes live, whereas people who don't know you will take a while to review your history before (hopefully) deciding to support you. RFAs go from this to this over their course.

Do feel free to ask if you've any questions...

Good luck, you'll be great! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 07:52, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I echo DHMO's support. And let me add that I would more than happily co-nominate you. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 07:55, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks to both of you! You'll probably see me at RfA in two weeks. Karanacs (talk) 12:06, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Heh. You might note that you've garnered one (premature and thus illegitimate) oppose already. So the people can't hold back; they want to get out there and !vote... --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 12:09, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Surprise! Should I explain the !voting "rules" to him so that he can strike for now and reenter his oppose at the appropriate time or just leave it? Karanacs (talk) 12:40, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

You should remove it completely and then explain the !voting rules to him. :-) --Malleus Fatuorum (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

(outdent:) So, d'ya want a co-nom? If not, no worries. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 13:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

If it is not too much trouble for you, then I would be flattered if you would do that. Since we've actually worked together, that would mean a lot. If you get busy though, no worries. Karanacs (talk) 13:34, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

When you've accepted and are ready, you need to transclude at WP:RFA; instructions are here. Good luck! dihydrogen monoxide (H₂O) 08:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Before you do that, by the way, could you give me a shout? I'd like to add something to my co-nom, but it's time sensitive, so I don't want to do it until the last minute. Thanks. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 23:17, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I will definitely let you know. I'll be out of town next week, so I'm planning to put this up on Monday the 16th probably. I'll leave you a note when i'm sure and wait until you've made any corrections you want. Thank you very much for the kind words that are there now...it's hard to express how nice that is to see. Karanacs (talk) 23:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peter Wall

Just to say thanks for closing. Hope all's well. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:12, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] FAC reviewer comments

Karanacs, to answer to your comment on my talk page: If I am not allowed to offer constructive criticism of reviewers poor reviewing skills, I dont see how we can expect to improve a process like FAC that really could use some improvement. If someone is going to oppose an article, they should be able to give a list of reasons why and what FAC criteria they feel has not been met in addition to providing any Wikipedia policies violated. I offered my comments in an effort to help him be a better reviewer for other articles in the future. FAC reviewers should not be allowed to insist on removal of sources that meet WP:RS as top level sources like the Norman book he proposed, they should also not bring up issues unrelated to the FAC process like his comment about Catholics creating Catholic articles. His comments were poorly offered, poorly organized and off-topic and he ended up provoking an argument among other editors of the page - completely unprofessional. If he was just a teenager learning from Wikipedia I would never have said anything but he is on the FAC team, a seasoned FAC reviewer who is expected to help lead a page to FA, not prevent it. NancyHeise (talk) 00:56, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Is it even worth pointing out a) that this is not a profession b) that there is no such thing as an "FAC team" and c) that my point about Norman was about the way that the source was used as though it were representative, not about the source itself? --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 01:05, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Karanacs, I think we were both correcting threading on the FAC at the same time, and duplicated each others' work. Since I'm in a hotel (leaving soon), can you doublecheck the work? I think I've removed all duplicates. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:13, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Sure, I'll take a look. I'm also planning to watch the FAC for the next 4 hours and fix any threading issues I see, so don't worry about this one for now. PS I hope they left chocolate on your pillow; it looks like you might need it soon! Karanacs (talk) 17:15, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Yes, plenty of chocolate, although I don't expect any on the plane! I'd like to try to keep the FAC readable; thanks for the help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:18, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I need chocolate, too! ;) --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 17:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

No, I think you and I really need divinity - especially the kind that is full of nuts! ;) Karanacs (talk) 17:25, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Assata Shakur

Should I interpret the archiving of my last comment to mean that you have no remaining comments about the article? Savidan 06:21, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, Savidan, I should have notified you before I did the archive. I've been intending to look at Assata Shakur again but haven't had a solid block of time yet. I'm glad that you were able to find sources about her other trials - I think that will round out the article a bit more. Karanacs (talk) 16:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I have decided to renominate the article. Just a heads up. If you find yourself with more time, feel free to comment anew. Savidan 22:01, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I really apologize for not having made the time to do an in-depth look at the article again. I skimmed it and I think it looks much better than before. I'll be out of town for the next week; if I manage to hijack a computer I'll try to do a review for the FAC. Good luck!! Karanacs (talk) 00:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] More

I just noticed that under "Useful stuff" on your userpage, there's a broken header. Is that intentional? Enigma ^message 02:51, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The hide template text? Yes, I did that on purpose so that I can copy and paste it into FAC noms when needed. I'm lazy ;) Karanacs (talk) 02:54, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

I tried to add something to explain, but I didn't do a very good job. There's a better way somewhere... Enigma ^message 03:05, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Good idea. I reworded to "How to cap text" since that is how I think of it. Karanacs (talk) 03:09, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Blue Ribbon

Karanacs, whenever a school gets a Blue Ribbon, it is a sign of notability. I will have to undo the four elementary school merges. Next time, when you see a Blue Ribbon, please start a talk page discussion first. WhisperToMe (talk) 19:51, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

A merge does not mean that the article is not notable on its own, but that there is not enough info to make a good article. I left a talk page message on at least one school before I merged and got no response after a week. The school district article already contained that information. If more info can be found in independent reliable sources, then the article should definitely be stand-alone; at this time there doesn't seem to be any. Karanacs (talk) 19:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC) <crossposted to User talk:WhisperToMe>

I'll search Google News and the Houston Chronicle for more sources - I.E. I found one newspaper source stating that Afton Village in Houston was zoned to Memorial MS and Memorial HS. WhisperToMe (talk) 20:02, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

That's still just trivial coverage, though. I really don't see the need for a separate article about an elementary school when the feeder information and the Blue Ribbon listing can go perfectly well in the ISD article (and much of it is already there). Karanacs (talk) 20:03, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

To resolve this I decided to start this: Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Schools#If_a_school_meets_some_notability_requirements_but_needs_more_sources - Your input will be highly appreciated :) WhisperToMe (talk) 17:26, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Anglesey Central Railway

(crossposted to assorted user's talk pages, if you're thinking this looks a bit familiar)
While looking at WP:GAN for other articles to review (I don't like nominating things without reviewing one if possible), I've come across Anglesey Central Railway. Looking at the creator's history, all they've worked on is this article and articles related to it (aside, bizarrely, from Characters in Asterix). While I can't in all honesty pass this at the moment – it has serious structural failures, as well as bending the MOS to breaking point – this is so much better than a new editor's usual "my favourite band" starting effort that I'd really like to get this one through the GA hoop. (IMO there's enough sourced content there to get it to FA.) I'll have a go at cleaning it up, but you're generally much better at the "nuts and bolts" side of things than me; would you mind having a look at it too, as I really think this looks like an author who should be encouraged. (What I know about Welsh railways can be summarised as 1) they're railways and 2) they're Welsh, so I don't think I'll be much use in content-adding.) — iridescent 21:39, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Karanacs is out this week; I did a lot of cleanup, but more is needed. The most significant thing is that publishers are missing on all sources, so they will need to be added so the article can be evaluated for reliability of sources. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RCC FAC

This message is being sent to all opposers of the Roman Catholic Church FAC. Thank you for taking the time to come see the page and give us your comments. I apologize for any drama caused by my imperfect human nature. As specified in WP:FAC, I am required to encourage you to come see the page and decide if your oppose still stands. Ceoil and others have made changes to prose and many edits have been made to address FAC reviewers comments like yours. Thank you. NancyHeise (talk) 23:53, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Signpost updated for June 2, 2008.

Weekly Delivery

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 08:17, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May FAC reviewer award

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		To Karanacs, For your superior reviews of at least 19 Featured article candidates during May, thank you for being one of the top reviewers this month and for your careful work and thorough reviews to help promote Wiki's finest work. Someone recently described you as an editor who is the best at pouring calming oil on troubled waters: keep up the exceptional work and your good-natured calmness! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:09, 8 June 2008 (UTC) Special thanks to Ling.Nut—a retired editor who had a strong commitment to excellence in content review—for designing this award, and to Maralia for running the stats for May.