User talk:Laser brain

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


Archives


FACs needing feedback
edit
Brian Horrocks Review it now
Strapping Young Lad Review it now
SummerSlam (1988) Review it now
SummerSlam (2007) Review it now
American Airlines Flight 11 Review it now
Rongorongo Review it now
Germany Schulz Review it now
1926 World Series Review it now
LSWR N15 class Review it now
Halo (series) Review it now

Contents

[edit] Hey

Good to see you (just as I'm getting ready to travel :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:50, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be playing catchup for a while. Happy traveling to you! --Laser brain (talk) 02:52, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
good to see you back too! Ealdgyth - Talk 03:03, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Good to be back! I haven't looked at FAC yet.. I hope I'm not desperately behind... --Laser brain (talk) 03:18, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Great to see you back. :) dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 08:56, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Welcome back. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 09:06, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Sixth-ed. (: --Kakofonous (talk) 10:36, 27 May 2008 (UTC)
Indeed, it was very disappointing to see you lambasted and trolled like this, and very heartening to see that you've stuck it out. Seems worthwhile to add my voice to those saying your work is valued, and I hope you don't listen too much to the negative nellies. WilyD 14:25, 27 May 2008 (UTC)

So you've been back for almost a week now... how're you taking it over all? dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 02:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Chocolate

Hey, the article passed a GAN with flying colors. Do you think it's ready for FA class now? Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 21:06, 28 May 2008 (UTC)

I don't have time to look it over tonight, but I will do so tomorrow. --Laser brain (talk) 02:21, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
I've looked at the comments that were left at the article talk page, and they're starting to get me annoyed. All of your comments were good, but I don't understand the reference comments. Why are Pantagraph and About.com bad sources? They're fine in my opinion. Also, I've added a "Chocolate in popular culture" section to the article. Can you give your thoughts on that? Also, more comments would be appreciated.

P.S. JimDunning is started to get on my nerves. He's reverting my edits just because I don't a give a super long edit summary. Why does it bother him so much? Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 18:55, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

Well, my point was that for a topic as broad as chocolate, you should be able to find much better sources. We need to use the best sources available. Hope that makes sense. I don't really have time to provide another review at this time. Regarding JimDunning, he appears to be acting in good faith and with the article's best interests in mind. I hope you can work with him. Edit summaries are not required but they are certainly a common courtesy to your fellow editors. --Laser brain (talk) 02:20, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
I AM looking at the criticisms, I just don't reply to all of them. Limetolime talk to me • look what I did! 21:23, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RCC

All protocol was followed before bringing this article to FAC including posting a request on the League of Copy Editor's page. Several editors have visited the page doing exactly what you have asked here - their comments were addressed as well as yours. If you don't have specific examples to give to support continued oppose, that makes your oppose invalid. I really think you are being unfair to not even look at the rest of the article to point out any other problems. NancyHeise (talk) 22:07, 30 May 2008 (UTC)

Also, per WP:CONS, which is a Wikipedia policy, not an essay someone wrote: "In essence, silence implies consent, if there is adequate exposure to the community. Consensus among a limited group of editors, at one place and time, should never over-ride community consensus on a wider scale, unless convincing arguments cause the new process to become widely accepted." WP:Silence and consensus is the wikilink within this official policy. I think it is more than just an essay, if not, it should be removed as a wikilink from the official policy page. NancyHeise (talk) 00:37, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] American > British spelling

You reverted my edits to Plate mail and left a message on my talk page telling me that it wasn't necessary. I apologize, I simply thought that Wikipedia on a whole used the Commonwealth spelling for everything. The Wikipedia page for armour, for example, is entirely in the Commonwealth spelling, and virtually every article I've read spells things the British way. Behaviour, labour, valour, etc. I know because my internet browser deems it a spelling error when things are written the British way, so I notice it a lot.

So I'm a little confused, in my experience British spelling seems to be the de facto standard way of writing things on Wikipedia.

[edit] Insane Clown Posse

I just checked the MTV News links, and they appear to be working again. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 06:36, 2 June 2008 (UTC))

  • Hi. I expanded the lead as you requested. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 18:19, 4 June 2008 (UTC))

[edit] RCC Nom

Now I've got back up off the floor - I have to congratulate you for integrity in this matter. Xandar (talk) 11:02, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for making me laugh. I saw your comment as I was leaving a different message on Xandar's talk page. Karanacs (talk) 13:47, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Glad I could be of service. :) --Laser brain (talk) 20:22, 2 June 2008 (UTC)
Would you be willing to give us some guidance on the FAC page regarding capitalization issues - specifically: Do we cap the sacraments? NancyHeise (talk) 00:43, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Smiles

Smuckers (talk) has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Cheers, and happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

[edit] PowerBook 100

Hello. You commented on this at the peer review, it's now at FAC. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 08:59, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Copy-edit

Hi, I noticed that you said you were listed at WP:PRV and willing to copy-edit any any arts-related topics. I was wondering if you would be willing to help me out ? I have put the Doggystyle article up for FAC and it has been requested that it receives a copy-edit before it can pass as a FA. A partial list of what has to be changed is at the FAC page, but I think the article would need a complete copy-edit to ensure it has good grammer and that the prose flows well. I personally don't know what to look for, so I would really appreciate your help. Can you help me out ? Please get back to me soon :) - Guerilla In Tha Mist (talk) 12:09, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I've taken care of everything that's been brought up, I think it just needs a copy-edit to bring it to FA status. Do you know any other editors who could help me out ? - Guerilla In Tha Mist (talk) 17:34, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Talk:Musical_instrument#Improving_this_article

I've left some comments and I have also added a list of good sources which are freely available on Google Books. Hope it helps - how is the rewrite going so far? — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 13:20, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

I would love to help with the writing, but I'm trying to fix Synthesizer at the moment (along with a load of other stuff listed here). — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 15:31, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
I actually hate writing these types of 'generic' topics, because there is so much to write. Another one I'm doing is a rewrite of Tourism in the United States, which is currently in my user space here. But anyway...when I came to Synthesizer a few months ago, it looked like this, so I naturally started to improve it. It is looking decent, though it still needs a lot of work doing. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 15:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] responding to your comment

He basically called all the support votes on the page idiots. I am not upset with his critique of my work, I am upset that he disparaged all of those people who came to the page, spent time reviewing it and decided to support. I know one of them is an editor for an journal and is a Yale graduate student. I think Tony's manner is abusive and discouraging to other editors, he should not be reviewing Wikipedia if he can't act like a gentleman. I think this is one of Wikipedia's own policies that no one seems to be enforcing. NancyHeise (talk) 18:32, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Because when a reviewer comes to the page to review the page, he states his own comment and reasons, he does not tell everyone on the page that their votes are stupid. NancyHeise (talk) 18:58, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Admin?

That's very nice of you to offer. The previous experience did discourage me and for a while I had one of those "I'm not an admin and don't want to be one!" infoboxes on my user page. I'm more open to the idea now though. Thing is... would I really use the extra privileges? I think I would prefer it if you nominated after I have completed the stuff on my to-do list, as I am in the process of rewriting several articles and cleaning up a few existing ones of mine. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 19:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

Maybe...I do come across a lot of vandalism and so it would be useful if I ever need to block an IP or, as you said, to sub-protect pages. I also think you are fit to be an admin, although you are quite new to Wikipedia - Do you think you'll consider it in a few months time maybe? You've learnt everything a lot faster than I did. It took me ages until I consistently used edit summaries. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 19:46, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, I do have that option selected (only discovered it within the past month when I also altered my signature's appearance). Thanks for letting me know anyway. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 20:23, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
Thank you for your support vote at Roman Catholic Church NancyHeise (talk) 04:40, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Down a few pegs

Sorry if my sarcasm came across like pouting. It gets the best of me sometimes. Although I admit I did feel a little silly doing an "exercise", and I do think the sentence is worse because of the changes, it's really not that big of a deal. I do appreciate your comments, and would of course like to see much more where that came from. Most of your other comments were spot-on, so I know the article on the whole has already been improved so far because of your comments, and will continue to be improved if you choose to participate in the FAC further. And of course I want to get that ugly "Oppose" out of there too! But seriously, I'm a big boy and can handle whatever you throw at me, even if I get a little sarcastic from time to time. Thanks so far for the help. Drewcifer (talk) 00:22, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Calgary Hitmen FAC

Hi, I've responded to your comments at the FAC for the Calgary Hitmen. I appreciate your comments, and hope that I have addressed your concerns. Thank you for the constructive feedback, and please let me know if there is anything more that requires addressing or clarification. Regards, Resolute 00:36, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thanks your your detailed review of the article. It is appreciated. Resolute 23:15, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] VNQDD

Thanks for the scanning Laser brain. I've done some updating for you. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 02:35, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Another thing about musical instruments

It is surprising that nobody has created that page yet. It makes perfect sense to have a separate history page. Good luck with it! — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 08:07, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: FAC "votes"

I just wanted to comment that there's nothing illogical about my rationale for opposing the Seth MacFarlane FAC nomination. I don't know if you read my comments carefully, but I noticed that when the subject is a public figure whose career has only recently begun, the article is likely to be edited heavily as he continues to work on different projects. The nominator realized that I was right when he withdrew the nomination. In any case, I really feel that you should take it easy. Sometimes, I might not feel the same way about the article as others. That doesn't mean that my opinion is any less valid. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 16:43, 6 June 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Assata Shakur

Thank your for your comments in this article's first (unsuccessful) nomination. I have recently renominated it. As the article has been somewhat expanded since you last saw it, would you mind re-reading it and commenting again? Savidan 21:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Comment

What about if it said "Therefore, Hogan and Savage were paired together to end their feuds with their respective on-screen rivals." There is no denying that they were. Nikki311 22:53, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

I did do a search of industry magazines at the University of Georgia library, but they did not have a single magazine. They had several books, though, which I already used in the article. There are several types of magazines. In general, they contain photos, a few interviews, editorials, and that sort of thing. The other type gives spoilers, rumors, and speculation, but in my opinion, those can't always be trusted. The last kind gives awards, like match or feud of the year. Nikki311 22:24, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

The Barnstar of Diligence
For your excellent FAC reviews. I was most surprised when I found you had less that 2000 edits; well done! Maxim(talk) 23:23, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

So... when's the RfA? ;-) giggy (:O) 01:42, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

June 2012? --Laser brain (talk) 03:43, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Featured Article review for San Francisco, California

Hi, I have started a Featured Article review for this article (located here). The primary contributor disagrees with all of my concerns about the article, so I was hoping you could look it over and give some feedback. If you don't have time, could you please recommend another editor that might be able to comment? Thanks, GaryColemanFan (talk) 01:20, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] May FAC reviewer award

The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia   
To Laser brain,
For your superior reviews of at least 46 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. You are always willing to dive in to the difficult reviews and roll up your sleeves to help bring candidates to status.
SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:56, 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.

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Benjamin Franklin Tilley

I just wanted to drop you a note saying that I have addressed one of your comments and will address the second (the position of "master") as soon as I am positive I have the right answer. JRP (talk) 21:22, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

I found information which at least allowed me to make a small stub: Master (naval) and I have wikilinked in the BFT article. JRP (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Your user page

Aw, what happened to that nice picture that you had? –thedemonhog talk • edits 21:59, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Halo (series)

We've completed the items you specifically mentioned, and have worked on the grammar (I'm sure there's more) but was wondering about your complaint about jargon. Basically, I don't see how we could pass 1a of WP:FA? if we wrote the article from a non-gamer's idiots guide perspective. ex. "Halo is a console video game; that is, a game featuring computer generated animated objects moving in a virtual world on a box which plays said items..." That's why we have links! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 23:16, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm sure there's some jargon we can cut, but some of it is kinda necessary, I think :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 00:03, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] For the record

If you have anything to say as regards me, ie. "Additionally, the way you and LuciferMorgan have treated me in this FAC makes the prospect of working with you pretty unpleasant", actually have the courtesy to say it on my page. Furthermore, I haven't "treated" you in any way. I have merely stated that I don't believe your concerns hold any weight, and I have the right to assert that opinion. When I mentioned "diatribe", I was actually referring to the FAC as a whole, and not one specific reviewer, just so you know. Such diatribe includes questioning Blabbermouth.net as a source, when articles which extensively use that site have already been passed. That also includes questioning the reliability of interviews, given the fact that journalist's get their 99% information from interviews. When they use information from a press release, that press release was written using group interviews. I'm sorry if you've taken what I've said to heart, but when FACs get to the point of questioning group interviews as a source for factual information, then those FACs are becoming absolutely ridiculous. LuciferMorgan (talk) 11:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

In response to your statement as regards consensus, I can understand if this happens on one occasion. When it happens every time a metal article is nominated for FAC though, it does get pathetic. Also, I reserve the right to use that word if I feel it is warranted.

The process is not perfect, and isn't above criticism.

However, irrelevant of your opinions as regards consensus, I still feel questioning the reliability of interviews is ridiculous. If you had actually taken the time to read music FAs, then you'll know that virtually all of them use interviews amongst their sources. In light of those FAs, I personally think this has already established consensus on using music interviews as a souce. LuciferMorgan (talk) 14:12, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Strapping Young Lad

Hi! Could you give me a list of articles about SYL from the International Index to Music Periodicals, if you have access to it/search in it? I want to see if there are more of them online, and whether I can use some more of them or not. Thanks in advance. Gocsa (talk) 13:17, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Hmm, I could only find the first and the last one online, I couldn't find the ones from Modern Drummer, Billboard, and Goldmine. I'd appreaciate if you could send these (the text) in e-mail here. Although I'm not seeing much here, many of them are just news articles. But please send them, if you could. Thank you! Gocsa (talk) 21:20, 9 June 2008 (UTC)
I have looked at the sources, but none of them is useful. The Billboard review of Alien is good, but I have already used 3-4 reviews of this album in the article.. Anyway, I'd like to thank you for your effort again! Gocsa (talk) 23:58, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Limetolime

Thank you. I was trying to figure out where to go with the next step. This is what I'm dealing with at Burger King legal issues. I feel badly because I get the impression that this is a young person with the right purpose, but the damage is increasing. Limetolime was recently appointed a project coordinator for Film and I've been hoping one or two of the more experienced coordinators would step in. Let's hope things end well.
Jim Dunning | talk 04:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Let me know (and someone should MfD that stupid awards page). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:01, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
At some article Limetoline was pushing to GA a month or so ago another editor had actually asked her/him if she/he was involved in some assignment or contest.
Jim Dunning | talk 13:03, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
I knew it had to be something like that. I also feel badly because he is a young person who is clearly susceptible to getting carried away with things like the award center (which I see has been twice nominated for deletion already). Well, I will be keeping an eye out. --Laser brain (talk) 15:41, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Limetolime

I am going to try and be calm. I am very annoyed that you, Laser brain, are saying that I'm being a disruptive editor to the users here. I am not. I'm trying to do well on the Chocolate article. The awards mishap was due to me having a bad day, not to annoy anyone. And YES, I will keep my coordinator position. Just because I hit a speed bump in my editing doesn't meen you get to take away one of my most prized positions. If I see more negative comments about me or any of my work, I'm going to have to report to an admin. Limetolime I want an award! • look what I did! 15:39, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Sigh. I am just going to say this once and for all: I AM NOT SUBMITTING ARTICLES FOR A CONTEST, I'M ONLY SUBMITTING THEM TO RECEIVE COMMENTS AND/OR USEFUL INFORMATION ON THE ARTICLE. I've tried Peer-review, but no ACTUAL user ever responds; I only get a generated script. Please stop the rumors, I am only trying to help. If you want me to review WP policies, I'll do that. :) Maybe I need a wikibreak. Summer vacaction is on right now, maybe now is a good time. Limetolime I want an award! • look what I did! 15:44, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
On more thing: I would like for someone to submit an AfD on that award page. I was extremely hurt when iMatthew took away my reward. Please try and understand. Limetolime I want an award! • look what I did! 15:47, 10 June 2008 (UTC)
Well, you have "I want an award" in your sig, don't you? As far as I can tell, iMatthew was acting with the integrity of the awards page in mind. Further reply on your Talk page. --Laser brain (talk) 15:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Brian Horrocks FAC

Hi there. Just letting you know that I got the nominator to ask some people to copyedit this (Since I noticed you, among other editors, had highlighted the prose poor at the FAC). Finetooth has now copyedited it. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 06:50, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I understand what you mean

I really do. Maybe Wikipedia is just too much for me. Do you think I should leave? Ask for some help when making changes? (I did try and do this; on the Chocolate talk page, I asked if a reference that I added was okay.) You saw this, didn't you? Please lend me some help, and I would like for you to monitor my edits to make sure I'm doing the right thing. Is that too much to ask?

P.S. Excuse the admin reporting threat, that was just the heat of the moment. Limetolime I want an award! • look what I did! 15:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ghosts

Hey Laser brain. Thanks again for your insightful comments at Ghosts I–IV's FAC. Unfortunately the FAC was closed pretty much right after your comments, but I suppose it could use a bit more work anyways. So, I was hoping I could ask you for a little guidance in that department. You seem to be a pretty unforgiving judge as far as prose goes, and I think that's exactly what the article needs before I renominate it. Any help you could give would be greatly appreciated, whether it be a copy edit or even a list of problem sentences you've found. Anything at all, really. And I'm a firm believer in reciprocity, so I'd be happy to return the favor in some way. Prose isn't my strongest point, but I'm decent at research and very good with technical stuff like tables, timelines, etc. Either way, thanks again for the help earlier, and keep it up! Drewcifer (talk) 02:30, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

There's no rush at all. I'm going to wait about a month or so until I bring it back to FAC, so take your time. Thanks so much! Drewcifer (talk) 16:58, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Halo (series).

Thanks for the review, once again... I've reworded or reworked the specific examples you gave, and Andonic also went through and gave the article a copy-edit, so I'd be much obliged if you could take another look. Cheers, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 13:15, 12 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review reminder

Hi Laser brain, this is a requested reminder to look at a peer review without a response at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog or at one of the newer articles without a response here. Thanks in advance for your help, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:29, 13 June 2008 (UTC)