User talk:The Rambling Man/Archive 30

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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.

Article title

Would it be ok if I moved England national football team managers to England national football team manager or England national football team management. I think in the current name makes it sound like a list. Buc (talk) 19:37, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Well of course you're more than welcome to move anything you like but I would disagree with either move. It's not a list, it's undergone a full-on PR and FA, passing successfully and no-one complained about the name. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:45, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer review and FLC stuff

Hi, TRM. If you have the time could you look at Degrassi: The Next Generation and comment at it's peer review, please? It just got given GA status and I want to take it to FAC soon.

Also I have nominated Chief Mouser to the Cabinet Office at FLC (here), and would appreciate any comments you can give there too, please.

Thirdly, I applied the {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} and {{CURRENTYEAR}} templates to List of UEFA club tournament winning managers, and it works. -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 22:11, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reviews at Degrassi and Chief mouser. I'll address the Peer review probably in the next 2 or 3 days. I also responded to your FLC comment re the cat (basically "how would you like to see it reworded"?) -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 18:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Carolina Panthers seasons

Greetings, I believe all of the critiques of this page have been resolved. Thanks, PGPirate 13:14, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

AFD

Rambling man, I saw your message:

Please stop closing the AFD against a clear community consensus. Continuing to do so will be viewed as vandalism and may result in your account being blocked, which really isn't a good thing. The Rambling Man (talk) 13:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

In this case, consensus has litte to do with this. The article violates WP:NOT#DIR, so consensus or not, it needs to be deleted as policy trumps consensus. The closing of the AFD is correct in that aspect, my closing is per WP:BOLD. Yes, it's technically against WP:NAC , but that's an essay and not a policy. Therefore it's not vandalism, removing the notice of closure, however, could be vandalism.  :)

Thanks Kosh Sez We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 13:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Rambling man,

I'm slightly curious as to why you would list something at AFD when you consider the consensus of the community to be meaningless? Anyway, please stop acting against the community consensus. Cheers! The Rambling Man (talk) 13:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

You're reading me wrong. I don't consider the consensus of the community invalid. In this case, this is a case of policy versus consensus. Whenever that occurs, policy trumps consensus, which is the case. As to your first question, I , myself can't delete it, hence the listing. Thanks Kosh Sez We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 14:08, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
br />

Ramblin man,

I didn't post it as a speedy delete because it doesn't meet the criteria. (I thought about it and your'e right, it would save some of the drama going on! :) ) Since it didn't meet the criteria, the only other option available was AFD. So no, I'm not listing it per WP:POINT or to waste the communities time.

Thanks Kosh Sez We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 14:33, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

So what did you hope to achieve with the AFD? Please tell me that's not a serious question. The purpose for any AFD is to submit an article for deletion (and most likely get it deleted) Yes, I saw that Tangerine, Nanonic, Struway2, Ian99, Refsworldlee, Ellison & Plutonium all said "Keep". All of them are also affiliated with the article in question, so their vote is COI. AS far it being a list in my opinion, that's rather odd, since a list is distinctly different from an article. The two can never be confused. No one, would ever confuse the topic of this AFD with an article, in fact, even the title confirms it's a list. Once again, we're back where we started, this article is a list, which is a fact, wikipedia dosen't allow list, as fact, therefore there is only one recourse, per policy which is to delete it over consensus. THanks Kosh Sez We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 17:07, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I was sorry to see your last message. Contrary to what you've stated - the list violated policy,and should be deleted. It does not meet speedy criteria or it would have been placed there. Also, policy does not override consensus. AGF as well, my AFD was not placed there as a point. It's sad that an admin and 'crat is stooping to this level. DOn't worry, I won't continue to clog your page or that report. I've explained my reasons , you don't appear to understand. No problem. Kosh Sez We don't need no stinkin FUR!! 17:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Note

Hope you didn't mind this. :) Acalamari 15:56, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Heh, heh, I've done the same before. :) You're welcome. Acalamari 16:01, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

• If I may make a small request though, when leaving a message informing a user of their promotion, would you mind providing a link to Wikipedia:New admin school please? It's up to you of course, but I would be grateful if you'd give a link to the school to admins you've just promoted. Thanks! Acalamari 21:51, 17 March 2008 (UTC)
  • Okay then, that's even better! Thanks, The Rambling Man! Acalamari 15:19, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Hurricanehink

Looks like I've edit conflicted with you on this one. I've reverted myself [1], its all yours... WjBscribe 21:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

I've responded to your comments at the Twillingate, Newfoundland and Labrador peer review. ~NeonFire372~ (talk) 22:05, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

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

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 (talk) 22:10, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

User:KoshVorlon

Hi. I am not in the habit of complaining to admins, but I really am getting to the end of it with the above user. You will know something of him - he is now accusing a bunch of us of WP:COI on List of hooligan firms. I've never touched the page in my life. I am thinking of filing at ANI, unless there is summary action taken beforehand. Thanks. Ref ^(chew)(do) 23:32, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Everything about this particular editor raises my hackles. Have you scanned his talk page? I await a string of ANI reports and a developing block log over the next few months. --Dweller (talk) 11:24, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Christina Milian peer review

Thank you so much for reviewing the article. It will keep me busy for a while. I don't really know to add a rationale, so could you please check it here? Thanks! Corn.u.co.pia Discussion 06:37, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Princess Louise TFA

Thanks! Couldn't have done it without your review :). Also, belated congrats on your promotion to bureaucratship! PeterSymonds | talk 07:08, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Featured lists of players

Have you seen this? I have to say I don't fancy having to create article on the likes of Lyndon Guscott and Austin Berkley in order to keep List of Gillingham F.C. players at FL, and I'm sure you feel the same about Chris Neville and David Whyte...... ChrisTheDude (talk) 09:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

Where? --Dweller (talk) 12:59, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Found. Done.

Moving back to the topic of NCFC History, I'm well on the way to being ready to list it at PR. I'm currently checking that I've not missed anything crucial pre 1972, before tidying the more modern sections and knocking off the last {{cn}}s. I expect the "old" sections to get a little larger and the more recent to get a little smaller. With that in mind, I think it's certainly not going to be recentist, but do you think it's looking well-balanced? --Dweller (talk) 14:54, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Busy afternoon? Don't they know you're an important man with better things to do? --Dweller (talk) 21:04, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Welcome back me old mucker. --Dweller (talk) 12:24, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Sanja Matsuri Peer Review

I just wanted to pop in and say a quick thanks to you for reviewing my Sanja Matsuri article. All suggestions were helpful, and I'm in the process of working on all of them. I'm very new to wikipedia editing, and it was very nice to get input and help from a veteran user. Thanks again! Torsodog (talk) 20:11, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

11th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment

TRM, I have opened a peer review for the mentioned article in the hopes of nominating it for FA status in a couple of weeks. If you get a chance, I would appreciate your comments. The PR can be found here. I know you try and concentrate on FA noms, but I think this article is close and would appreciate your feedback in hopes of making the FA nom process easier. Regards, Daysleeper47 (talk) 20:34, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Nominating List of acquisitions made by Google as an WP:FLC

I have nominated List of acquisitions made by Google as an WP:FLC at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions made by Google and if you have time, please leave any comments that you might have. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 00:44, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I have responded to your comments. Please respond. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 04:45, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Responded. Gary King (talk) 18:03, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Degrassi peer review

I've completed the comments from your peer review. Would you be able look over it again? -- Matthew | talk | Contribs 02:36, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Hello

You OK, dude? --Dweller (talk) 11:05, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, just glad you're OK. --Dweller (talk) 13:00, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

I dub thee "Mr Citeweb", thanks! I'm gonna be outta here mostly until Tuesday. See you around. --Dweller (talk) 18:53, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

FLCs, de-featuring and all that jazz

No worries, I'll take a butchers at the FLC later, but I'm struggling with some chronic PC problems this morning so it might not be right away. As for the de-featuring argument, I had a look last night (clearly I have too much time on my hands :-) ) and there's 707 more players who would need to be added to the Gillingham list, which would obviously be ludicrous. If the outcome of the FLRC does come out "against" the standard football list, I'm going to put in a RM to move my list to List of Gillingham F.C. players with 100 career appearances (or some such) and then they can't argue for it to be de-featured because it's still complete, well-defined and all those other things that a FL needs to be. If someone says the 100 cut-off is arbitrary, well that's the criterion under which it was promoted to FL and nobody queried it then. And if someone claims that the Gills FT should be rescinded because the coverage is no longer complete.......well, such is life I guess......

Sheesh, listen to me go on. Maybe I should be called the Rambling Man ;-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:26, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Check it out.......

User:ChrisTheDude/Sandbox/Players who have played less than 100 matches for Gillingham F.C. - there's a lot of stubs there that would need creating! ;-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 10:48, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Actually all the data is known, even on the early players, I just haven't put it in yet...... ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:03, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Maybe I should clarify that only players who have played in the Football League are included. I do have basic appearance data for the non-FL seasons (but nothing else, not even full names), but I don't think there's anyway that even the most rampant inclusionist would claim that F. Smith who played 1 Southern League match in 1894 should be on the master list....... ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:09, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I dunno.....I just looked at one of the ice hockey ones which does include every player, and it says it "includes players that have played at least one match, either in the NHL regular season or in the NHL playoffs". But then the American sports model is very different to ours. I'm sure some compromise could be worked out..... ChrisTheDude (talk) 11:15, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for closing my RfA as successful

Oh snap, the DEA is an admin

I would like to thank you for your participation in my recent RfA, which I'm very glad to say was successful at 81/7/0. Some of the very best that Wikipedia has to offer came out to support or oppose me and the kind words from all the editors has really given me confidence to be an admin and I can't wait to start. I will take the advice of the opposes and not jump into any content disputes immediately. As well, I will try to add more content myself. Anyways, in thanks for participating in my RfA, here's your very own personal humanoid robot. Enjoy! --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 14:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

And someone tried to support right afterwards. --ÐeadΣyeДrrow (Talk - Contribs) 14:29, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

PR "backlog"

Thanks for all of your work on the PR backlog. Per your suggestion, I added as of the 15th and changed it to at least 5 days old. There was also a review from the 14th a bit out of order in the chronological list, so I added that too. This should keep us happy / busy for a few more hours ;-) Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:30, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

List of football clubs in England by major honours won

I'm asking you since you commented on the PR, but currently the list includes wins in the Fairs Cup, but according to the UEFA Cup page, the Fairs Cup is not recognised by UEFA as a European trophy. Given the query regarding major honours would you have any advice on whether to include it or not in this list? Peanut4 (talk) 17:41, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Ai. Just spotted your comment. I'm very tempted to delist it and re-work it properly. I'm almost convinced to add other trophies onto the list, i.e. Football League Trophy, Full Members Cup, Charity Shield. It does seem very POV at the moment and open to any type of criticism, whether at FL stage or later on. Peanut4 (talk) 17:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

It's not a problem. I was already beginning to worry I was a bit hasty in listing it. Like I said I just took over someone else's work without thinking of the overall picture. Any suggestions? You reckon I should remove it as an FLC? What about adding other honours?

As an aside regarding the lists, me and User:GiantSnowman have built the List of Bradford City A.F.C. players into a complete list of every player to have played a league game for Bradford. It's very big and can be slow to load up. Just thought I'd let you know as a comparison to the list of more than 100 games, etc. Peanut4 (talk) 17:52, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Green Bay Packers head coaches

For your information. Thanks for the review, got anything else for me? :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:07, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

I replied, just to let you know :-) « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:09, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Dang you are a fast replier lol, thanks again for the review! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:17, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, in about a month (when classes end) I may hit you up with some reviewing requests ;-) but seriously thanks for the review and the offer, cheers! « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:22, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

WikiCup

The WikiCup has begun, best wishes for the tournament.

STORMTRACKER 94 ^{Go Irish!} 22:35, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Maynard James Keenan Peer review

Fellow cabalist and newest Burrowcat, hai! Uhm... so I'm taking this article to FA, hopefully. And by I I mean WikiProject Tool. Anyway, if you have the time and will, I'd be much appreciated if you could give some feedback! Thanks for your consideration, regards Lara❤Love 05:28, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Scottish footy champions FLC

"Are you sure they're all there?" Who's missing then....? ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:53, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

D'oh, sorry, bit early in the morning for me ;-) ChrisTheDude (talk) 08:18, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Navenby

Many thanks Rambling Man. I'll take a look now. I don't know how I did it, but I mnanaged to get it nominated twice for a peer review ... Then, when I tried to close one, I closed them both! Managed to revert that, then stuck with two again. Sorry!--Seahamlass (talk) 14:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

RE: Colly

Certainly, but you will have to count me out until tomorrow, the man himself is batting right now and I refuse to miss another second. KP for a hundred! SGGH ^speak! 01:23, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Edmund the Martyr

I you dare want to arbitrate, please do! I've been labeled as troublesome at Edmund the Martyr. Cheers! Wassupwestcoast (talk) 03:01, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

FLCs

Hi, we've currently got over 40 FLCs, including a dozen that are more than 10 days old, so could you please review a couple of them? Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 03:58, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Green Wing (series 1)

I've carried out the changes that you asked for. Thanks for your comments. ISD (talk) 11:48, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. ISD (talk) 11:55, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Treehouse of Horror V

Moved feedback to Peer review please reply there. Buc (talk) 12:02, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

List of WCW Hardcore Champions

Hi, I've nominated List of WCW Hardcore Champions for FL, but I've only gotten one response (which were comments and what was mentioned is fixed) and when and if you have time, your comments would be appreciated. Cheers,--TrUCo-X 13:39, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I replied to it.--TrUCo-X 17:15, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Is there a way I can fix that? Compared to other PW title lists, they aren't sortable, this is the first sortable list. So do you know a way to fix it?--TrUCo-X 17:24, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey Rambler, if its ok if I can call you that. I fixed that, and I've fixed everything else you pointed out.--TrUCo-X 17:35, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Tenacious D discography

Hi, I'm just leaving a note to say I looked at your points on the above article, and took care of them. Thanks for checking it out. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 13:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorted out that cite. Would you be willing to support? 86.157.108.183 (talk) 19:54, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorry, I forgot to sign above. Thanks for the help. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 20:47, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Lemoine peer review

I've responded to some things. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 17:53, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/SS_Christopher_Columbus#SS_Christopher_Columbus

Thanks for your initial comments, I've addressed each one I think. In some cases I could use a little clarification, but in others I think I got them sorted. Appreciate the feedback! This FAC has been a long time coming and I'm keen to see if I can get her there, or if not, regroup and try again after addressing whatever is brought up this time. ++Lar: t/c 20:46, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

See what you think of the image arrangement now, eh? I gave {{imagestack}} another go. I think that's all the changes now. (looking for ref nums out of order is quite the eye test but I think I got them all... :) ) thanks again. ++Lar: t/c 21:06, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

No Way Out (2004)

Hey Rambler, sorry to bother you again but can you review the above article?--TrUCo-X 22:05, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Another FLC with a current season issue

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Carolina Panthers seasons just thought you might want to know. Buc (talk) 10:51, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Ping

You got mail. « Gonzo fan2007 (talk ♦ contribs) 18:58, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Quick work

Wow. That was quick. Glad to support. Now, off to watch another disappointing performance!! Peanut4 (talk) 11:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

PR Backlog

It does seem to be going well, doesn't it? I have thought about making the "backlog" for an earlier date (2 or 3 days without a review?) but am not sure that would be as useful. What do you think? I also note several more volunteer reviewers have signed up since the Signpost article and will probably let them know about the backlog reduction drive (if we leave any articles for them to review ;-) ). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:56, 24 March 2008 (UTC) PS Forgot to wish you a happy Easter too! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:45, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, I have moved it to three days and added the two articles that had not yet been reviewed. I am also going to try letting the archiving go a little longer (currently at one week without a response, try to get up to 10 days). Thanks as always for all of your work on reviews! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:05, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Big Shots PR

Thanks for your thorough peer review.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:43, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Sites of Special Scientific Interest in Hertfordshire

Regarding your comment of reducing the size of the tick, I'd like to request your input on this matter. I've used the standard {{check mark}} template used for other FLs of this sort, so I'd like to request some input from you on this matter, please. Thanks, Qst (talk) 18:46, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Other than that and once concern Rudget commented on, all your issues have been addressed. Qst (talk) 18:53, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Thats everything now. Qst (talk) 19:30, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

Help with I7114080

Thanks for your support on the nomination of Carrie Underwood discography's WP:FLC nomination. As you know, User:I7114080 and I had disputes during the last nomination of the article for FLC. Now, he's at it again (although its only been one edit that I've undid) so far. What should I do? I'm trying my best to be civil here, but, my patience is wearing thin. I need your advice on how to approach this issue and user. Cheers. σмgнgσмg^(talk) 02:35, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've undid some of his edits, and TenPoundHammer and myself have left messages on his talk page requesting that we negotiate with him with the changes but, he is refusing to cooperate. [2] What should I do? σмgнgσмg^(talk) 02:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

No matter, the resolution has been solved, albeit temporarily. σмgнgσмg^(talk) 06:38, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey there

Np, yes, but exhausting. 5–1 was nice, as is the cricket score. --Dweller (talk) 10:40, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Yup. It's the article he couldn't finish. NB I found some great material for Justin Fashanu over the weekend - a lengthy and surprisingly revealing (though not about that of course) interview with him c.1981 in a kids' footie annual. Just not sure my heart's in it for doing a lot of work on such a tragic story. --Dweller (talk) 11:03, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Very odd. The stars on my userpage look blown up, enormous, but no edits have been made to it. Any idea why? --Dweller (talk) 11:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Groovy, go for it! (re the stars - I wonder if someone's been buggering with the images themselves) --Dweller (talk) 11:19, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Flummoxed. See Wikipedia:Village_pump_(technical)#Barnstars_format --Dweller (talk) 11:25, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

FT

Great; go for it. You may get opposition because of Intertoto? I also wonder if it needs an article to hang it all together? We don't have a UEFA Club competitions or similar that explains all the details and history of the comps and the info available at UEFA is pathetic. --Dweller (talk) 12:18, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I think Intertoto is defensible as there are no "winners" really. If we go with a main article though, I suppose it'd have to be included. The kind of main article I envisage would deal with each of the UEFA competitions with lots of {{main}} tags. Shouldn't be too hard to knock something into FA quality - some material already in (e.g.) UEFA Cup etc and loads easily accessible. What do you think? Feel free to disagree or solicit other opinions. NB I stress I'm not sure a main article's needed, and it may create new problems for the FT, as it'd arguably open up the Topic to issues not just about winning managers. Not quite sure how to deal with that. --Dweller (talk) 13:06, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of acquisitions made by Google

Fixed Gary King (talk) 15:51, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Nominating List of billionaires (2008) for WP:FLC

I'm nominating List of billionaires (2008) for WP:FLC at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of billionaires (2008). Please leave comments if you have time. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 17:46, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

done Gary King (talk) 18:10, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I've also nominated Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of billionaires (2006). Gary King (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your help with Charley's peer review.You're welcome. I hope all the other users of the template are good with the modification too! Hadn't thought of that...I suppose I'll be hearing about it soon enough if there were problems, LOL.TheNobleSith (talk) 18:04, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

In-universe, jargon, and context

Hi Rambling Man (or should I include the The?), I like WP:PCR (Provide context for the reader) and WP:JARGON (explain jargon) in the cases you mentioned. I normally write about geography (creeks and parks) and am sometimes a bit uncomfortable reviewing fiction, so I always try to back up my suggestions with WP:IN-U and the like.

I thought Saruman was an article that did a tremendous job keeping an "out of universe" perspective, if you want a model / good example for fiction. No good model of a jargon-free article comes to mind right now - take care, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:12, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Reply

Yes, the discussion does seem to have stalled, I haven't been involved recently because I think I've said everything I have to say. The FLRC will be left open for 14 days and I'll probably try to get someone else to close it (maybe Woody) As for your comment about the List of Medal of Honor recipients, I think it is more along the lines of a portal than a list, but the user is correct that every winner is either included in the list, or some offshoot of the list, so I think it satisfies the completeness requirements. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:00, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey there Rambling Man

Many thanks for your concern re: my talk page ramblings... Bit of a run in with an editor who deleted a load of my Navenby pictures and was feeling sorry for myself! Got a bit panicked cos now up to second on the list to be reviewed for FA and could imagine a blank page awaiting the reviewer...! Some stuff sorted now though, and hopefully rest tomorrow. Phew! Still plodding on with your PR suggestions for improvements. Many thanks, once again, for such a thorough review. --Seahamlass (talk) 21:58, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

Toshack and Tallon

Tallon is ready. Toshack is probably looking for a bit of help for the non cricketers. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:11, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

SOS - Tallon is moving down to the bottom.... Blnguyen (vote in the photo straw poll) 06:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Yes. And you should see the article I speedied. His vituperative response was about 10x the length of the article. --Dweller (talk) 15:50, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Shall we aim to finish NCFC History next week? --Dweller (talk) 14:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Need some Dwelltribution on anything? Also, NB - Tintin needs cheering up. See the Don Tallon FAC and also my recent contribs. --Dweller (talk) 14:48, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Fenerbahçe S.K. edit war

Hi. I see you keep adding sections to Fenerbahçe S.K. and an anonymous editor (with variable IP address) keeps removing them. This needs to be resolved. Firstly, just a quick word to say adding to a page won't protect it. You need to be an admin to protect a page. Secondly, you add no edit summary so your edits will always be treated with caution. Thirdly, your edits only have a single citation. I need you to start explaining what's going on here as the edit history shows this page is becoming a mess. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:25, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Firstly, all pages about Champions League quarter finalist teams has protect. So why Fenerbahçe SK can't be protected? Secondly, i just removing that anonymous editor's (ip address: 78.163.249.*** or 78.163.250.***) sections, for example i made club captains and managerssummaries with same table as "Period/Names/Trophies" explanations, but that editor changes it with difference. I just want to make same table explanations. And he alwasy remove Atatürk and Fenerbahçe summary but its referenced sumamry from clubs museum. Thirdly, i didnt understand what u are asking about, can u explain a little please? If u are talking about my edits have copies, because i just want to add referenced informations. Gokhantig (talk) 19:54, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Rental Magica episodes

Please inform me if there's anything else that needs to be addressed. Oh, and thanks for all the help you've given to User:Gary King, my admin coachee. The amount of work he's done since I started the coaching and now is rather astounding, and several of his recent featured work is due to your help in the matter. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 01:51, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks on both accounts. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 07:52, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

List of The Bellflower Bunnies episodes

Hi. I've just submitted, for PR, the list for a little known French/Canadian children's cartoon called The Bellflower Bunnies. I think I am the only Wikipedian who knows so much, so far, about the show and its original book series material.

I'm also willing to submit this as an FLC in a few days. Tell me what you think of the page, and I'll address concerns soon. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:35, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorting Dutch surnames

Hi, Re sorting by name in your manager lists. On the Dutch Wikipedia, nl:Louis van Gaal, nl:Bert van Marwijk, and nl:Aad de Mos catsort on the name part of the surname, not on the prefix, e.g Gaal, Louis van, whereas nl:Paul Van Himst (a Belgian with a capital V) catsorts on the whole thing. Assuming the Dutch know how to sort their own names, presumably we should follow their example. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 08:34, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/CWY2190

Hi TRM,

It seems that something went screwy and you somehow removed a vote by User:Athaenara on this RfA when you closed it. I went ahead and added it back in, updating the final tally for the sake of completeness. I just thought I'd let you know so you don't wonder why your close isn't shown as the top edit (and also so I could check and make sure I didn't mess something up). Thanks! --jonny-mt 08:37, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

First law of Bureaucrats: always hit F5 just before closing (ie. after reading). {{Rfah}} is also a bureaucrats' friend when such a tight call is being made :) Daniel (talk) 01:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Masters Tournament champions

Impeccable timing as always, it's at FLC right now NapHit (talk) 21:20, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Cheers TRM, I've left responded to your comments at the FLC, check ack when you have a spare second if you would. Cheers NapHit (talk) 22:18, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Super Bowl champions

I finished most of the comments you made here. What exactly do you mean by a sortable table? I think it looks fine at the moment - but, I will of course, change it. I converted all (about 50 !) references to {{citeweb}} Thanks, - Milk's Favorite Cookie 00:05, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Larrys Creek tributaries

Thanks so much for your comments on the list - I will work on them in the next day or so.

While I think this approach could work at GAN, I think it would only work after a backlog elimination drive (start with a clean slate, as it were). I also find the PR is taking much more of my time and could not lead the effort at GAN. I do think automation at PR will help make things easier. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I agree a bot could help a lot with PR - archiving is also a chore. I will put in a bot request - don't really know how to write a bot or who else to ask. Good idea, thanks Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 10:51, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Rehab PR

Thank you for your thoughtful review.--Esprit15d • talk • contribs 12:53, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

List of Medal of Honor recipients

Sorry to bother but I was hoping you could answer a technical question for me. I am trying to figure out how to use the nowrap and sortname templates with piping and I can't get it to work. Someone suggested you may know how to do this. If you look at the above article, you will see several that have (Medal of Honor) in the title and those are the ones I am trying to fix. Thanks in advance for the help.--Kumioko (talk) 12:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the help.--Kumioko (talk) 13:37, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

East Anglian Derby

I'm asking you because you have alot more experience than me and also I noticed you created this article.

Ipswich are former English champions and FA Cup winners, and have even won the UEFA Cup. Norwich City's highest title by contrast is the League Cup.

I'm not being pickey as I'm an Ipswich fan, but this sentence doesn't seem very NPOV to me, especially with phrases like have even. I personally think it needs rewording, but don't know to what. Also if you think I'm wrong please let me know as I'm relatively new to all of this. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Good job!

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For firmly cementing your place as the most invaluable editor to ever grace WP:FLC, and for consistently doing so with uncommonly good civility and humour. Seegoon (talk) 18:57, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Request for Review

If you've got the time, I'm trying to find someone unfamiliar with American football who would be willing to take a look at 2005 ACC Championship Game and give a few suggestions where the prose is difficult to understand or unclear. I'd be extremely grateful if you could look it over. Feel free to contact me if you are or are not willing to do so. I'd appreciate a response either way. Thanks. JKBrooks85 (talk) 19:31, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: forcing image sizes, I don't see where in MOS Images that it says you shouldn't force the size. Can you point that out for me? I must be overlooking it. Thanks. JKBrooks85 (talk) 20:21, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Good to know. I was afraid that not forcing the images would hurt the look of the page, but it doesn't look to have affected it that much. And it's always nice to make a page more accessible to users with special needs. Thanks for the tip. JKBrooks85 (talk) 08:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

We did it, SS Chris is a Featured Article!

yaay!

Thanks for your help in getting the good ship SS Christopher Columbus to Featured Article status. The nomination went swimmingly, it was clear sailing all the way, no one turned up to torpedo it, and she passed easily.

that's the ticket!

Some very helpful and astute comments... highly appreciated. ++Lar: t/c 22:29, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Source

Yes, its the 4th reference on the list, it's to a Evening Star article. Is that ok? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of International Mathematical Olympiads

I've addressed your points. Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 19:37, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

And again. Any additional comments, other than the date formatting, which I'm currently working on? Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 18:09, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Exasperation

Sorry about that, I was simply annoyed at having to change it once more. Personally, I don't see the difference between them, nor find that if follows Hollywood to say World War I. Simply my opinion on the matter, you have yours. For the tone and general feeling behind them, I can only apologise. Not sure why changing the War notation did that. Again, apologies and thanks for your comments. Woody (talk) 20:16, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

No, no hard feelings at all. I still don't know why it riled me so, probably marginally related to AVFC and their current "issues" in letting in goals left, right and centre!!! Don't know why they are doing that either? Woody (talk) 20:40, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

		The Reviewers Award
		To The Rambling Man, for all your work at Peer Review, especially reviews to keep the backlog at bay. Given with respect and admiration, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:46, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi

Hi. Took a squizz. Dropped a friendly note and will take it from there. --Dweller (talk) 21:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

A User claiming to be an admin

Just thought I'd ask you because I couldn't find what out what to do. This user is claiming to be an admin and using the identify of another user. I don't know if I am allowed to delete content on other peoples userpages or if these user pages can be considered fo deletion. The reason I am asking you is because the admin he is claiming to be has been inactive for a while now, so it didn't seem appropriate to ask him. Many thanks Rambo's Revenge (talk) 11:03, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

The box at the top of his user page currently says he's a featured user (admin) and then says has been identified as such (but it is linking to Acetic Acids RfA), I checked and that user isn't an admin. Also he claimed it on his userpage here. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 12:31, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Super Bowl champions

Alright, finished....with almost everything. How do I centrally aligning the reference column? And, I really would consider city-data a reliable source. If you still don't think so - I will of course change it. Thanks, - Milk's Favorite Cookie 13:38, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done I can't figure out the tables though. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 14:23, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

It looks beautiful ;) Thanks. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 15:56, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Y Done Changed sources. - Milk's Favorite Cookie 16:37, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. Also, I'm not sure if you would know how to do this; I asked someone else, they said it was not possible - but, the TOC in my talk page, is there a way you can make the whole thing visible. (My screen resolution is 1280 X 1024) Milk's Favorite Cookie :  Chat  17:04, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Gday!

OK, here goes. I'm finishing my FAC/c-e on Don Tallon for the unpronouncable one. I've started a review/c-e of some fungus or other for User:Casliber, and I'm dealing with a few issues that have cropped up from speedy work. But I absolutely refuse to do anything else now before we finish NCFC History. It's been too dang long. Lol. Btw, did you see the reply at my talk from the newbie Canary? I had to reassure him you were a good guy. I vaguely recall that when I first came across your edits / old username, I thought for a fraction of a minute that you were wearing a black hat... until, IIRC, you made an edit at Blocker. --Dweller (talk) 10:01, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

About a week longer ago was this one! --Dweller (talk) 10:39, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

One down. While I'm getting all fungal, would you mind reviewing a lengthy post I got a few days back on my talk page, complaining that I'd removed a speedy request from an article the editor viewed as being a hoax? I wasn't sure what to make of it... I was sympathetic to some comments, but under AGF could still assume its genuine despite apparent shortcomings. Was considering AfD. What do you think? --Dweller (talk) 11:49, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Tyvm. User_talk:Dweller#Lovejoy_Article. I see I missed a "nudge" from them, too. Oops. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool. I've just added to my to-do list, but am going to work on the History article alongside the fungus, as the latter is very very boring. --Dweller (talk) 12:54, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Talk:History_of_Norwich_City_F.C.#To-do_list --Dweller (talk) 15:44, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

List of New York hurricanes FLC

Hi, thank you for your review on Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of New York hurricanes. I believe I fixed the majority of the issues, except for one which I am searching for a fix. Is there anything else you think needs to be done? Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 12:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. :) I've replace that dead link, which should fix it. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Ok, will do, you always have good comments and ideas for articles. I'm considering nominating Weather front for FAC sometime in the future. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:38, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Would {{cite web}} suffice for the references? Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:46, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool. And as for the images, I'll make sure they are all correctly sized. I'm probably going to wait a while before nominating it, as it just failed FAC no more than two months ago (even though the issues have been fixed). Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:50, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wow, I didn't think of that. It sounds like a good idea, though. I do think, however, that I should wait until List of New York hurricanes FLC is closed so I don't have to much on my plate at one time. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 16:55, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Sounds good, thanks. I'll get on those refs and pictures, and I'll renom it. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 17:00, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Here we go; Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Weather front. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 19:57, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Cool, I look foreward to seeing you there. Yea, I've had wiki-days like that. Juliancolton ^{The storm still blows...} 20:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Nicking old images

Blnguyen has specialised in nicking old images from books or web, because, erm, they're old. Know how to do this, or what the limits are? If not, I'll drop him a line. --Dweller (talk) 15:47, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. He's used much more recent stuff, esp. for all the Invincibles topics. scratches head and waits --Dweller (talk) 16:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

NCFC History

Working my way through cns, currently at the 1 win in last 20 matches one. Soccerbase can generate a complete list of NCFC's 94/5 results, but I don't know how to make its url specific to that set of data. Any ideas? --Dweller (talk) 16:27, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

OK, scratch that. Now, how about finding specific date league tables (like a March 1st 2008 table for the Roeder info at the bottom, or whatever) --Dweller (talk) 16:32, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Much better! --Dweller (talk) 16:33, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

If we can knock off the remaining cns and tidy the cites, we'll be ready for PR today/tomorrow, I reckon. --Dweller (talk) 08:38, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

OK... I'm stuck on the last two cns. Shouldn't be hard to find, but I can't! --Dweller (talk) 09:51, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Want to try finding them? Anyway, I've been a bit "previous" and done this Wikipedia:Peer review/History of Norwich City F.C./archive1. Ugh, what have they done to the templates? --Dweller (talk) 09:59, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

My RfA

Oh my, I didn't even prepare a speech! I'd like to thank the Academy... Seriously, though, thanks so much! - CobaltBlueTony™ _talk 17:08, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Secisek’s Personal Attack

I assume in the interests of impartiality you are going to second my warning regarding Secisek’s personal attack on me with the foul accusation of stalking? I talk such accusations (and the innuendos) very seriously. Thanks. EdChampion (talk) 18:24, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

I suggest you read the Edmund the Martyr talk page. Secisek’s writes "I have accused you of stalking me". I mentioned that above and I know that you have read his comments. Your reply is very, very puzzling ??? EdChampion (talk) 18:45, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Go to the talk page and search for the quote. Secisek's comment dated 19:53, 26 March 2008 (UTC). Squirm if you want to but I won't bother you again - you've pretty much answered my suspicions. Secisek wasn't subject to this kind of inquisition... EdChampion (talk) 19:30, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Chicago Bears head coaches

I think I got everything. Thanks, - Milks F'avorite Cookie 21:02, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Carrie Underwood discography

Thanks for your continuous support in the promotion of Carrie Underwood discography. It was a rollercoaster journey. I look forward in working with you in the future. σмgнgσмg^(talk) 02:48, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much

Thanks for your peer review of List of tributaries of Larrys Creek, here. I have made the suggested changes, but there were a few I had questions on if you have a chance. Thanks again, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:06, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

• On the backlog, I will take at least Pipe organ and Campus of Texas A&M University tomorrow. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:43, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
  • The good news is that there are no unreviewed requests for March 30. The bad news is 10 more entomology requests have been posted so far on April 2. Sigh. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
    • I am troubled by the entomology project articles in general - the assignment rules do not always conform to the MOS, the topics seem to be splitting hairs (there was already someting about entomology and decomposition, now one of the 10 new ones is just plain decomposition), and I agree that WP articles do not generally need a conclusion (despite WP:IAR). There is also the issue of the prof making all 10 of the latest PR requests - if the students are supposed to learn the process, that seems to defeat the purpose. Now there are certainly other scool projects (the Latin American authors and novels group MMM, also have seen a small group working on Arab history) and there are also editors who tend to submit groups of requests (James Bond films come to mind). Still these entomology article requests seem close to exhausting the capacity of the system, as do any large group of similar requests. My hope is that this is the last of the entomology group. I will also look at the PR reviewers volunteers and see if I can ask for a few helpers here - Casliber for the species and there is at least one who lists entomology as an interest, keep up the good work. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:17, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
    • PS thanks for your support at FLC too Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 11:18, 2 April 2008 (UTC)
      • You are very welcome, hope it helps - I fgured out the over two legs (two games / matches), but it still confused me at first. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:07, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Userfied article

I'm unconvinced User:Eastmain/Marci Lipman has been improved to the extent it passes WP:BIO, but I'd be prepared to move it back to the mainspace and AfD it simultaneously. What do you think? --Dweller (talk) 08:45, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

This is Amanda, from the Forensic Entomology: Stages of Decomposition article. I have been working through your list of suggestions for peer review and have drastically tried to improve the article with your advice. I really appreciated your response, I'm new around here and did not know some of these things even existed! If you don't mind, and have the time, could you please review the article again to see if there are any other obvious issues? We have not changed the title of the artile since we are currently working out the issues on where to place the article.--Amandamartinez06 (talk) 10:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

PR

I don't get it. NB As it seems we're now all done, will you help me run the rule over the citations? --Dweller (talk) 12:05, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Grrrroooooovy. --Dweller (talk) 12:13, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Norwich City F.C. managers

In the upper table (the one that'll stay) if you could help me set up the columns etc for the 1st two managers that'd be great and I'll then use it as a template to complete the details. Cheers. --Dweller (talk) 14:14, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Ooh. Tis a thing of beauty. Thanks! Seen ANI? --Dweller (talk) 14:23, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

EH??!?!? -Dweller (talk) 14:29, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Two wikis? You editing in French, German or Simple English? --Dweller (talk) 15:09, 1 April 2008 (UTC)
If no edits to the PR by this time tomorrow, I vote we go to FAC directly. What do you say? --Dweller (talk) 16:28, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Hmm. OK, mebbe. --Dweller (talk) 16:41, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Lol. Not too keen on the seasons thing (and would like to take the current season off the template, as it's a bit fanziney). There's a few of the FT pages under way - logged at User:Dweller/Featured. --Dweller (talk) 16:46, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Think of it this way... oh bugger. Can't think of a witty riposte. --Dweller (talk) 16:50, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Oxford United Managers peer review

Thank You for the comments. I have made some changes and was wondering if you could have a second look. Thanks. Eddie6705 (talk) 19:12, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

FLC:Orlando Magic draft history

Hello, it's been 12 days since I replied to your comments at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Orlando Magic draft history, could you "re-review" whenever you have time? Thanks.--Crzycheetah 23:33, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

FTC

I find it funny that people ignored my FTC, and voted on one after mine. Why? - Milks F'avorite Cookie 01:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Managers

It's developing nicely. Combining (e.g.) Megson's two spells into one box would be good for me, as it'd keep his stats together, which a) aids comparisons and b) means I don't need to skirt close to the OR wind to split the stats I have. --Dweller (talk) 10:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

NB Do you think I'd be able to do a FT nom that excluded an article about players, relying instead on the Players of the Year or Hall of Fame list article/s? --Dweller (talk) 11:38, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Probably could find a list. I'd avoid trouble by creating List of Norwich City F.C. players with 100 appearances or perhaps List of Norwich City F.C. centurions and find RS for that usage (plenty recently for Becks) Re Megson... <sigh> and Walker probably could, but the early managers might be very tricky. Could go down the Gills route and use "not known"s. --Dweller (talk) 11:54, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

New graphical challenge for you. A nice idea: A horizontal bar, representing Norwich's professional era from 1905 to today, with each manager's tenure depicted by shading. Would be a good way of illustrating rapidity of turnover. Your mission, should you choose to accept it ... --Dweller (talk) 12:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

NB I'm not 100% certain the dates in the article (where given) are accurate yet. --Dweller (talk) 12:25, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cheers. I've started responding. --Dweller (talk) 18:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Cups FT

Hi, certainly didn't intend to push you into withdrawing the FTC, and if the consensus had been that the omission of the Intertoto didn't constitute a gap, then I wouldn't have opposed, though couldn't have supported. UEFA call the Super Cup a competition, so going by their definitions your suggested "List of UEFA club competition winning managers" would be fine (it's never looked particularly competitive on TV, but that's by the by). You'd still be stuck with the Intertoto though (in my opinion, anyway ;-)

On another tack, how do you think the Arsenal player list FLRC will end up? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 12:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Withdrawing it definitely puts you on the moral high ground, anyway ;-) If you are intending to do the Intertoto managers as well, I'd be happy to offer research assistance, if it'd help. As to player lists, I've got 952 BCFC players having played at least one Football League/Premier League game, of which 326 have less than 10 appearances and 81 (!) just one. And most, hardly surprisingly, are redlinks. One thing I have learnt, this mythical transclusion limit whereby you can't keep including template calls must be set a lot higher than once was, because that table has at least two (sortname and flag) on each row and it still loads and sorts OK, albeit slowly. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:00, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Which shows why we shouldn't be expected to do complete lists. It's enormous because I kept the functionality of the existing FL. If all they want is a meaningless unsortable mass of names with no information against each, it'd be a fraction the size and accessible to all regardless of computing power, but wouldn't serve the purpose. And if I added the players who played in the Football Alliance before they invented the Second Division, and those who played in the FA Cup before they invented professional football, there'd be another 82. </rant over> It can be easily chopped into 3 or 4 at any point and made into fork lists, anyway. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 16:24, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

Hey there! Thanks for your kind comments about the students' projects. I figured the peer review section wouldn't be able to help with the technical side of things, but given that most of the students lack basic writing skills, I really wanted them to get feedback about their style, grammar, etc. (instead of the content) from someone other than me. They seem to take comments from this community much, much more seriously than anything I write in red pen on their papers, and that's making them better writers.

I hope the requests haven't overwhelmed the peer review section! I was really just looking to open them up to outside review, which many of them have not experienced at any time in their college career. Thanks again for your help! ABrundage, Texas A&M University (talk) 15:22, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks

Hey, thanks again for the peer review on Forensic Entomology: Stages of Decomposition. We're working through the details. As far as the Cite web thing goes I am unsure where to use this. I looked how its supposed to be used but am still confused on when and where to use it. Should all of my references be in a different format than they currently are? Or is this just for links to websites? Is this inserted into the ref section during the article? Thanks again,--Amandamartinez06 (talk) 19:29, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for March 31st, 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) 20:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Delaware

Nothing wrong with Delware, just haven't made it there yet. I need to get there for some Genealogical research, but keep having issues getting on the road. Thanks for reviewing Easy Jet! Ealdgyth - Talk 21:30, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

List of Medal of Honor recipients

Have you had a chance to rereview this page. Its been some time now and I am almost ready to submit the next one?--Kumioko (talk) 21:36, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of True Tears episodes

Just curious whether I addressed all of your concerns. Cheers, Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 21:57, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Could you do me a favour?

Hi. I don't know if you've come across User:Robinepowell, though I doubt it because of the areas you seem to work in, however at wikiproect TV, she is known as a pest. As a pain in my back side, she repeatedly unformats references and removes wikilinks from articles, changes date formatting, and wot not. She's been warned and blocked repeatedly, but continues. This was her recent edit to season 7 of Degrassi. Could you block her for 4 hours or something? -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 00:20, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Renames

Hi Rambling Man. As I said a few days ago on my talkpage, I'm going to be away for the next week. I'm likely to have little if any internet access so if you have time to get involved in the renaming process, that would be great. WjBscribe 06:40, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Intertoto managers

Hi, what's your attitude to references? Do you need a reference which explicitly says Manager X won the intertoto cup with Team Y (obviously this would be best), or is it enough to supply proof that X was manager at the relevant time? cheers, Struway2 (talk) 07:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sunday's weather

I hear it's going to snow. While we're on the subject of snow, would you mind putting this out of its misbegotten misery? Thanks. --Dweller (talk) 09:37, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks so much for the snowman. --Dweller (talk) 15:50, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Peer Review

Some thorny perens have popped up, as well as a new one to me - FA/F.A./UEFA etc. Pop along please when you have a mo. --Dweller (talk) 10:48, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I hate days like that. Not sure how long I'll have at keyboard before my usual weekend disappearance. Glad you're reviewing my PR comments. Happy for you to over-rule. Btw I've asked Raul to consider our first FA as a Main Pager, on the 20th anniversary. I think our more recent FAs are much much more thorough. Interesting to see. --Dweller (talk) 15:52, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

I think it'll be FA/UEFA. In which case F.C. looks odd to me. Sigh. --Dweller (talk) 15:53, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Carolina Panthers seasons

Hello again. You recently reviewed Carolina Panthers seasons for WP:FLC. I believe all of the issues are complete for this FLC. If you have time, could you please review the article once more. Thanks, PGPirate 12:28, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Old pix

Good news. Looks like pix by unknown snappers are fair game for us if taken before 1958. --Dweller (talk) 12:47, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Robin did it again

here Some of the things she put are completely incorrect, such as Kylie Minogue appearing - it's Natasha Bedingfield, and again she removed wikilinking, and commas from dates. The only thing she did do right was change "America" to "U.S." -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:38, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

And here. I don't want to revert a third time in 24 hours, as I don't know if it applies to vandalism. I'm not even sure if she is doing it as vandalism or out of stupidity, although from the number of warnings and blocks she's received about these things, I'd be inclined to say the former. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:46, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:59, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Degrassi

Major mistakes, needed fixing, again, not to mention the link to CTV is wrong. Which CTV are you referring to? Also added Shirley Douglas a very well known Canadian actress by the older generation (famous also for being Kiefer Sutherland's mother). If Kylie Mingoue is going to be mentioned as a guest star, so should she. Robinepowell (talk) 19:39, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

You changed "Degrassi: The Next Generation is a Canadian serial teen drama television series." to "Degrassi: The Next Generation is a Canadian teen drama TV series." "CTV, a Canadian broadcast television network" to on (7:00 p.m. in Quebec) CTV". Ok, the disambig should have been fixed, and 7:00 included, but to remove information which provides context to the average reader is wrong. Editing references, even if it's just removing wikilinking should also be avoided as they also provide context to the reader.

Sorry to fill your talk page with this, TRM. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 19:51, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of International Mathematical Olympiads

I've formatted the dates now. Anything else? Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 03:02, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Erm, sorry if I sound impatient, but you don't seem to have responded... Nousernamesleft^{copper, not wood} 15:33, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Intercrappy cup

Fair enough. I've also made some additions... hope you like 'em. In the interest of balance, is it worth mentioning how clubs (certainly in England, dunno about elsewhere) snubbed it for most of its history? Also, wondered if you thought it worth adding a word or two about how teams would be deemed "leading" - my vague addition, which might need tightening slightly. --Dweller (talk) 12:38, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the revert

Hi there! Thanks much for your reverts to vandalism on my user page. I appreciate it! Mspraveen (talk) 16:34, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Season 7

Thanks for keeping an eye on the page.. That one eit you reverted was correct though. It was me that put the wrong info! Anyway, I put it back right. Noticed the two arguments at FLC and FLRC.. The same people who are arguing for completeness at one want incompleteness at the other! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 16:51, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

You mean you're opting out of making further comments at those two candidates, or the entire FLC/FLCR process? If it's the latter it would be a complete shame. And I think he was wrong to accuse you of being Pointy. Consistency throughout every list should be what we strive to achieve, and I've noticed that you've commented on other nominations that you won't support or oppose until the Arsenal players list issue is resolved. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 16:59, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Just a little! I don't know how that one's going to play out. I said to remove, but then at least I've been consistent and opposed other lists that aren't complete, such as that High School one, the Hurricans season, and a couple of others in the past. -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 17:13, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Sarumio wrestler

Le sigh. - Dudesleeper / Talk 21:47, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

1995 Japanese Grand Prix

Hi The Rambling Man. I've noticed quite a bit at WP:PR that you do a little bit in reviewing sports articles. I don't know whether you take requests, but I was wondering whether you could possibly review the 1995 Japanese GP article, and leave comments on the talkpage. I would be much appreciated if you could do this. Regards, D.M.N. (talk) 21:27, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. I asked, as I'm planning to take it to FAC within the next week. D.M.N. (talk) 15:44, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks for the suggestions. You may wish to comment on my final comments. Apart from that, you can have this:

		The Original Barnstar
		For the suggestions you made in helping me improve the quality of the 1995 Japanese Grand Prix article. Thank you very much! D.M.N. (talk) 18:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

ALoan memorial

Popped in. Sounds good. Off to bed. Night night! --Dweller (talk) 23:05, 5 April 2008 (UTC)

Because it's been going so long... middle one, otherwise I'd have said the last one. Will help out from tomorrow. Cheers. --Dweller (talk) 17:19, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Articles with no official name

Your talk on Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Snow Bowl (Green Bay) about the title has got me thinking. "Snow Bowl" is clearly not an original title, it's a nickname really, is a nickname really a good title for an article? But if not this title then what?

There are a hundrerds of other articles on here with the same problem such as Hand of God goal and The Catch (American football). I've been thinking if it is worth tring to find better titles for them and as you said before they are unhelpful to someone who knows nothing about the subject. On the other hand a lot of them are very well known by these unofficial names and really have no official name.

Just wondered if you have any thoughts on this idea and if you would be interested in helping at all. Buc (talk) 10:00, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Would this fit under "most commonly used name"? Buc (talk) 12:57, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

What about other articles with titles like that? Buc (talk) 13:17, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

StormBot

Hello, The Rambling Man! A project you are involved in, The WikiCup ,has signed up for automatic message delivery from StormBot, an automated bot account using AutoWikiBrowser. StormBot will be delivering you news and notifications about the project on your talk page. If anything is wrong or you have any suggestions to make, please notify the creator, Stormtracker94. Thank you. This message was delivered by StormBot StormBot (talk) 17:38, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Wisden Cricketers of the Year

Great work. Thanks for taking on such a big job. However the footnote "Selection of five Englishmen in 2005 followed victory in the 2005 Ashes" is wrobg. Wisden comes out in April, so the selection of 5 Englishmen in the 2005 edition had nothing to do with the winning of the Ashes. JH (talk page) 19:52, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Just one comment at the moment - well, more of a query, really. I see that in the section that you've been working on you've switched to chronological order rather than reverse chronological order. Presumably at some point you'll be reversing the order of the sections as well, so that they too are in chronological order? Otherwise it will seem a little strange. JH (talk page) 20:13, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

UEFA tourney winning managers FTC take 2

Let's hope nobody brings up the UEFA Regions Cup....... ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:09, 6 April 2008 (UTC)

Don't worry, I wouldn't dream of bringing it up..... ChrisTheDude (talk) 07:36, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

April GA Newsletter

The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 04:05, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 6 - April 2008 March issue | May issue Project News There are currently 3,868 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 195 unreviewed articles. Out of 267 total nominations, 57 are on hold, 13 are under review, and 2 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: A4232 road, New York State Route 63, Great American Boycott, First Great Western, Duck Soup, Sanja Matsuri, Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing), Prospect Mountain Veterans Memorial Highway, Aliens (film), and Roanoke Regional Airport. The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (27 articles), Sports and recreation (25 articles), Transport (24 articles), Music (19 articles), War and military (19 articles), Politics and government (18 articles), Religion, mysticism and mythology (16 articles), Literature (14 articles), World history (14 articles), and Video and computer games (14 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 12 articles up for re-review. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of March, a total of 92 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 74 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 18 were delisted. There are currently 14 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. Congratulations to Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), who sweeped a whopping 51 articles during the month! Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) also deserves congrats for sweeping a total of 26 articles! Reviewer of the Month Dihydrogen monoxide is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for March, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Dihydrogen monoxide hails from Brisbane in Queensland, Australia, and has been editing Wikipedia since April 6, 2007. He has contributed to 8 Featured articles and is an avid reviewer and contributor to the Good articles program. Other reviewers should check out his Noob's Guide to GA Reviewing. Congratulations to Dihydrogen monoxide! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of March include: GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs) Limetolime (talk · contribs) Malachirality (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) Wrad (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 195 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 13 new members that joined during the month of March: AndreNatas (talk · contribs) Dank55 (talk · contribs) English836 (talk · contribs) ExplorerCY (talk · contribs) JayJ47 (talk · contribs) Mastrchf91 (talk · contribs) MBK004 (talk · contribs) Million Moments (talk · contribs) Neparis (talk · contribs) Nicholas Perkins (talk · contribs) NimiTize (talk · contribs) PGPirate (talk · contribs) Zenlax (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! To delist or not to delist, that is the question So you’ve found an article that, on the face of it, does not merit its good article status. What next? Especially where there are many glaring issues that need addressing, it’s tempting to just revoke its GA status and remove it from the list, but although we are encouraged as editors to be bold, this approach (known to some as "bold delisting") is not recommended good practice. There are many reasons why a listed article might not meet the assessment criteria—it’s always possible that it never did, and was passed in error, but more likely the criteria have changed or the article quality has degraded since its original assessment. Either way, we should treat its reassessment with no less tact and patience than we would a fresh nomination. This, in fact, provides a good starting point for the delisting process. Approach the article as though it has been nominated for GA review. Read it and the GA criteria carefully, and provide a full reassessment on the article talk page. Explain where and why the article no longer meets the criteria, and suggest remedies. Having explained why the article no longer meets current GA criteria, allow its editors time to fix it! In keeping with the above approach, it may help to treat the article as on hold. There is no need to tag it as such, but give editors a reasonable deadline, and consider helping out with the repair work. Bear in mind that more flexibility may be required than for a normal hold—the editors did not request or expect your reassessment and will probably have other projects taking up their time. They may not have worked on the article for months or even years, and at worst the article may have been abandoned and its authors no longer active. As always, communication is the key. It sometimes helps to post messages to relevant WikiProjects (found at the top of the article talk page), or to contact editors directly (this tool is useful for identifying active editors for any given article). Only once the above process has run its course, and sufficient improvement has not been forthcoming, is it time to think about delisting the article. Communicate your final decision on the article talk page, even if there was no response to your reassessment and hold, and take the time to fill in the various edit summaries on the article talk and GA list pages to ensure the delisting is transparent and trackable. If you have any doubts about your final decision, you can list the article at Good article reassessment or contact one of the GA mentors, who will be happy to advise. Article reassessment is perhaps the single most controversial function of our WikiProject, and the one with the most potential to upset and alienate editors. Yet it is one of the most necessary too, since without the ability to revoke an article’s status we would be unable to maintain quality within the project. However, if we approach reassessment sensitively and with the goal of improving articles to the point where sanctions are unnecessary, we will ensure that delisting is the last resort, not the first. Delisting instructions From the Editors As we near the 4,000 Good Articles milestone, the project continues to grow and to gain respect in the Wikipedia community. Nevertheless, we continue to have a large backlog. If every member of WikiProject Good Articles would review just one article each day during the month of April, the backlog would be eliminated! Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (GA Sweeps and Did You Know correspondent) EyeSerene (Article) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: • Unforgiven (2006) • Corporation Park, Blackburn • The Great American Bash (2007) • Jenny (Doctor Who) • No Such Thing as Vampires Reassessment: Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 216 articles (42 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 15 June 2008 | edit

Robin

I hate her!!! User:Robinepowell has made a number of edits to the List of Degrassi: The Next Generation episodes now, starting with this. And then continued to make about ten more, whereby she has split hour-length episodes into two and just copied the summary, removed punctuation, and more. The only thing she got right was the spelling of an episode title. I have reverted her edits and left a note on her talkpage, but I'm at my wits end. IPs and her have literally destroyed that page this weekend! -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:06, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

More relaxing things

I've been working on a List of LAPD officers killed in the line of duty in my sandbox, but I'd appreciate your opinion on the way to present the information. As you can see, the size of the footnotes is the same size as the table itself.

I had started to create articles for all the cops, but they were speedily deleted and then restored following a discussion here: User_talk:Wangi#Speedy_delete_of_John_Toolen. I did ten or so in all before they were deleted but Wangi kindly put the deleted content back in my sandbox and so I turned them into footnotes. Another user has prodded those that died as a result of traffic accidents, which is fine I guess.

Anyway, my question is this:

As one of the permanently present FLC reviewers, do you think I should incorporate the footnotes into the table, or create articles for each cop that has a footnote and Wikilink the name. Currently, the footnotes only point out those who died a different day they were injured, where more than one died in the same accident, or where they were awarded a medal or honoured some other way. I could shade the cells in different colours to highlight that information if I put the footnoted prose into individual articles, which would be a lot neater after all, but I can also see the benefit of including it in the table. So what do you think? -- ṃ•α•Ł•ṭ•ʰ•Ə•Щ• @ 04:17, 7 April 2008 (UTC)