User talk:Vimalkalyan/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This user wrote Mahendra Singh Dhoni, which is a good article.
This user made significant contributions to Indian national cricket captains, a featured list.
This user made significant contributions to 2007 NFL Draft, a featured list.
This user made significant contributions to 2007 Cricket World Cup statistics, a featured list.
This user made significant contributions to 2007 Cricket World Cup squads, a featured list.
This user made significant contributions to Cricket World Cup records, a featured list.
This user was awarded the Good Article Medal of Merit for contribution in GA articles review.
This user was awarded the Barnstar for excellent work on Indian cricket and Andhra Pradesh articles.
Archive This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Contents


Cm of Andhra

Hi., i was working on the List of Chief Ministers of Andhra Pradesh wikipage and removed the earlier reference to caste/community of the CM. I checked with the other CM list for reference - List of Chief Ministers of Tamil Nadu (FL) and there is no mention of the caste/community of the CM. An anom. editor (59.93.77.103) added the detail back and left this message on the talk page of the article - "no. caste is relevent. ap politics without caste is a joke - 59.93.77.103". I am wondering if we need to semi-protect this page. Let me know. Kalyan 18:14, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, unfortunately you can't sprotect a page to disable an anon opponent, but I disagree that it should not be there and I am watching. Blnguyen (bananabucket) 03:56, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

1990 New York Giants season

I addressed most of your concerns and responded on the talk page. Quadzilla99 23:56, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Thank you for reviewing the Birla Institute of Technology and Science article for the GA nomination. I appreciate it. Cheers.. Vinwe 03:01, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Randolph Foundation GA review

Thank you for your extensive review of the Randolph Foundation article. While I don't exactly concur with some of your assessments, I think that your review was very thorough, and I much prefer that sort of review which might actually help improve the article to a more cursory, but perhaps more favorable one. I'll probably ruminate on your comments for a day or so and then see what I can do to address your concerns. Cheers, DickClarkMises 19:23, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Re: South of Heaven

I certainly remember you - I have a good knack for remembering names on Wikipedia. As concerns you leaving feedback being "not so good news", that's incorrect. If you hadn't left feedback, that would've been not so good news. Feedback is great since it tightens an article, and I want to thank you for leaving some. Thanks for deeming the article to be GA. If there's an article you want me to look at in order to leave constructive feedback for, feel free to message me. LuciferMorgan 17:59, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm assuming that you're either just a cricket fan, or want to improve India related articles. Lists aren't really my strength, though I'll get back to you in the next few days with some feedback on the Dhoni GAN - of course that'll be just advice, and can be used or discarded. Music / entertainment is a better strength, though I'm willing to review whatever you got going - just keen to put my reviewing skills (or lack of) to good use really. LuciferMorgan 18:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: FLC

Thanks for the heads up. I prefer not to vote at those type of things though. I thought I was commenting on a peer review when I wrote in! Looks like you should be OK without me anyway. →Ollie (talk • contribs) 23:03, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: HRC - GA review

> Hi., can you please leave a note on my talk page once you are done addressing my comments
> on the Hillary Rodham Clinton article. Kalyan 19:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm done. Wasted Time R 20:37, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your work on bringing this to GA. Your review comments were very helpful, especially the need for basic biographical details at various points — something that often gets overlooked among all the political contention over these kinds of articles. Wasted Time R 15:52, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Macartney

Hi, I have responded to your comments. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:46, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

KP-FAC

Hi,

Don't worry about missing the peer review. I've addressed all of your concerns. All valid points, I hope I've sorted them to your satisfaction. If not, let me know. Feel free to check it again and lend your support :-)

Thanks again, updated–MDCollins (talk) 23:07, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Ok. Thanks - didn't realise that. –MDCollins (talk) 09:40, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

Tables

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Cricket#Query_raised_in_list_article_FLC_review Cheers --Dweller 09:54, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

GA noms and articlehistory errors

Your addition of GA nominations to articlehistory templates is populating the error category for articlehistory. Please have a look at the instructions at {{ArticleHistory}} and let me know if I can help. Nomination processes are not added to the articlehistory template. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

No problem; let me know if you ever need help, but basically, the GAN stays outside of the template until it's passed or failed. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:25, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Re: KP issue

Haha, it's cool; it's just always been my nature. Don't mind me, I do it without realising a lot of the time too, probably. :p AllynJ 19:51, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

FLC vote

I've removed my oppose vote, as more references have been added. If the remainder the article is adequately referenced (i.e. the other tables. Yes, you have the source there, but specific references are better), then I will be happy to support. Best of luck. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 20:00, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Bicycle and motorcycle dynamics

Hi, thanks for reviewing Bicycle and motorcycle dynamics. It's been over a week since you put the article on hold, do you think you could come back and review the progress? Thanks, SeveroTC 09:29, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it again. It's pretty late (or early?) here, 3 am nearly, and I've just got in from work so I will try to address this issue tomorrow. Regards, SeveroTC 01:42, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
Thanks again for coming back to the article, it is really appreciated that you made the effort! I think we have a few pointers as we work towards FA, but do you have anything to add? Thanks again, SeveroTC 13:49, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The Good Article Medal of Merit

The Good Article Medal of Merit 
I have awarded you this medal for your work in helping to reduce the backlog during the Good Article Candidates Backlog Elimination Drive. You reviewed five or more articles during the drive, which helped to contribute to the large decrease in the backlog. If you have the time, please continue to review articles to help make sure the backlog does not jump back up to what it was. Good job and happy editing! Nehrams2020 06:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Redlinks on List of New Jersey Devils players

I just wanted to make sure that I took care of all the redlinks on List of New Jersey Devils players as it seemed to be your main concern at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of New Jersey Devils players. If you find anything else you think should be fixed, please address it. BsroiaadnTalk 03:09, 16 June 2007 (UTC)


Your GA nomination of Mahendra Singh Dhoni

The article Mahendra Singh Dhoni you nominated as a good article has passed , see Talk:Mahendra Singh Dhoni for eventual comments about the article. Well done!


  • Great job on the article, and I hope some of the pointers below the review that I put on the talk page help, as the article moves along in quality towards FA status. Smee 04:38, 17 June 2007 (UTC)

GA nom of Natascha Kampusch

Hi -- just thought I'd check on the status of this; I saw you added a note to the GAC page saying that GA comments were left on the talk page. They were, but it was quite a while ago, and there's supposed to be a seven day limit on a hold, so as nothing seemed to be happening I took the hold off and left it as available for review again. Did I miss something? Mike Christie (talk) 02:52, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm not one of the editors of the article -- I was just cleaning up on the GA page; the holds aren't supposed to go on longer than 7 days, if possible. Can I suggest that you let the editors know that if they don't respond, the article will be failed? Thanks. Mike Christie (talk) 11:34, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
OK, I just realized you've left a note on the talk page; thanks! Mike Christie (talk) 11:36, 19 June 2007 (UTC)