User talk:Reywas92/Archive 11

Titus Canyon

Happy New Year! A friendly note to explain my reversion of your edit to Titus Canyon. After identifiying several days ago the redundancy you noted, I've been working (albeit slowly) to fix the article's numerous problems. There's far less redundancy now, and much of the content your redirect removed had been completely rewritten. Per a suggestion made by an editor at the Village Pump, I plan to trim Places of interest in the Death Valley area#Titus Canyon severely, basically repeating only the lede. I think this makes sense, since Titus Canyon is probably deserving of an article of its own but doesn't need a detailed discussion elsewhere. I haven't had time to check closely yet, but I suspect there are other sections of Places of interest in the Death Valley area that are way too long and redundant. The to-do list continues to grow.

Cheers,

Rivertorch (talk) 07:20, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

ISS FAC4

Just to say 'thanks very much' for that comment you placed. It's nice to have some moral support. :-) Colds7ream (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

Signing

As a courtesy to other editors, it is a Wikipedia guideline to sign your posts on talk pages, user talk pages, and WikiProject pages. To do so, simply add four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your comments. Your user name or IP address (if you are not logged in) and the date will then be automatically added along with a timestamp when you save your comment. Signing your comments helps people to find out who said something and provides them with a link to your user/talk page (for further discussion). For further info, read Wikipedia:Talk page guidelines. Thank you.--William S. Saturn (talk) 02:32, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When using certain templates on talk pages, don't forget to substitute with text by adding subst: to the template tag. For example, use {{subst:uw-test1}} instead of {{uw-test1}}. This reduces server load and prevents accidental blanking of the template. Thank you. --William S. Saturn (talk) 02:33, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for copyediting Sherman Minton, it was pretty rough. I finally dug out a couple more books on him, I might get the article to GA yet quality yet. :) —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 20:00, 3 January 2010 (UTC)

List of Australian Open Men's Singles champions

Hello, please go back and close the comments you made if you think I have resolved them adequately.BLUE_DOG^TN 03:44, 6 January 2010 (UTC)

Indiana War Memiorial plaza

Hello! I see you are working on the war plaza. I have a few pictures I took there of the plaza, and the inside of the building from about two months ago. The inside photos of a varying quality because there is rather poor lighting. I can upload them for you this evening to check out though it you like. A couple of them are pretty nice, and they would be PD too. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 01:01, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

I uploaded the the rest that are of any quality [1]. The inside of the building has very poor lighting, I have a lot more pictures, but they didn't turn out so swell. I have a photo of the Minton-Capehart building too, it is fair quality. Le me know if you'd like it too. I also have some photos of the guide plaques which are probably not PD but have some interesting information. I could email them you if you like. —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 02:23, 7 January 2010 (UTC)

On the subject of the Plaza — ever since I first saw it, I've been quite impressed by the picture you took from the Chase Tower. Is there public access to the building, or were you able to get up there for some other reason? I was downtown on Monday (but the Monument is closed on Mondays :-( and got lots of local pictures, which I'm currently in process of uploading. Nyttend (talk) 23:05, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Not trying to be picky, but do you have the permissions email? I don't see any evidence of OTRS or anything else on the picture; I'd been assuming that you were Matt Jacques. Nyttend (talk) 23:24, 8 January 2010 (UTC)

Oops, I just realised that the topic was the World War Memorial Plaza, not the Soldiers and Sailors Monument. Sorry for being a bit obtuse...Nyttend (talk) 00:16, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of international cricket centuries by Marcus Trescothick/archive1

Hi, I have responded to your comments at this FLC and hope that you can return to check if I have met your concerns adequately and if possible provide your support or opposition to this article being promoted. Regards, Harrias (talk) 18:43, 11 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of National Historic Landmarks in Indiana/archive2

Can you respond to Nmadjan's latest question? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 16:35, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey, congratulations upon the list's promotion by Dabomb87 to FL! Great job, I am happy for you. :) --doncram (talk) 05:02, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for your help! Reywas92^Talk 12:54, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of World Series champions/archive1

You stopped by here briefly commenting on the "World Series champions" versus "World Series baseball champions" issue. It's been resolved, hope you can stop by again when you get the chance! Staxringold _talk^contribs 17:40, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Nobel Prize

Hello! I am currently working on the "Swedish Project" and "Award and Prizes"'s article Nobel Prize. Since it is a top importance article and not even GA class I am trying to make it a GA article and perhaps further after that. However, I'm in a state now where I could use some help. I need a new pair (several pairs in fact) of eyes to look at the article and the talk page for improving prose, debation of different things and some sourcing. Do you got any possibility to help out? BR --Esuzu 12:15, 16 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esuzu (talk • contribs)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Aurealis Award for best horror novel/archive1

Hi, can you revisit this FLC? The article has been moved per your suggestion. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:00, 19 January 2010 (UTC)

Collen Hanabusa Picture

A picture of Collen Hanabusa for the page at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hawaii's_1st_congressional_district_special_election,_2010 is available at her campaign website. Here's the link: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2626/4168524654_bc2ea6189a_o.jpg 06:13, 21 January 2010 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.95.177.163 (talk)

Talkback

Hello, Reywas92. You have new messages at Clinton Presidential Center's talk page.
Message added 21:48, 22 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Template fail. Talk:Clinton Presidential Center.  fetchcomms☛ 21:49, 22 January 2010 (UTC)

Bob Dyer

Hi Reywas. You might try googling Bob Dyer (combine it with "Missouri" or "Boonville" to narrow it); I don't think your verdict of "non-notable" holds. The link demonstrates the currency of the etymology in folk music. DavidOaks (talk) 20:04, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

Well, there's no article on him here, and nothing I found provided anything significant. Just tell the etymology, but the WP:Popular culture stuff is unneeded. Reywas92^Talk 21:33, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

UA 223 on Denver International Airport

I saw that you reverted 98.193.44.166's edit which added "United Airlines Flight 223" to the page. I don't think you thought this was vandalism, so I'm just wondering why you removed the listing from the page. Could we add it back with more detail about the incident, or do we agree (and I certainly do) that this was not a notable incident? You can see an article from the Denver Post for more details about the UA 223 incident. Thanks! Mononomic (talk) 03:40, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

We have no article on it, as it is not notable. Some drunk idiot trying to open a plane door is not notable and need not be included in the DIA article. It doesn't have much to do with the airport itself anyway. Cheers, Reywas92^Talk 03:59, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

FLC review

Recently, you commented on the featured topic candidacy for Major League Baseball awards. As per the ongoing discussion there, two lists are being added to the topic, but have not yet gone through FLC. This is just a friendly note, in case you are not watching the FTC, asking reviewers to comment at the FLCs if you have time. The first article's nomination is underway. Thanks for your time. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 01:18, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Tourism in Costa Rica

It would be helpful if you left an edit summary when making such a substantial revert. May I ask your objection to my edit? RashersTierney (talk) 22:12, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I just meant to revert the spam added before you. Reywas92^Talk 23:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

No harm done, but that's why we use edit summaries. Best. RashersTierney (talk) 23:13, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Reywas92. You have new messages at RashersTierney's talk page.
Message added 13:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

'Tourism' is not synonymous with 'Tourists' RashersTierney (talk) 13:30, 30 January 2010 (UTC)

prod of Nimrud Baito

I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Nimrud Baito, which you proposed for deletion. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still think the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! Ray^Talk 05:12, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Berliner

By reading your user page, should JFK have said "Ich bin Berliner.", not "Ich bin ein Berliner." Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:05, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

Funny things happen in Wikipedia. I just read an interesing thing about the State of the Union address and how media professionals tried to make it less distracting. You then edited the article. I also commented on a business school FA candidate and commented on the lead and you commented on the lead of another article. Suomi Finland 2009 (talk) 20:15, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

What do you mean about Ich bin ein Berliner, and what does it have to do with my userpage? That article indicates that Kennedy was indeed correct in what he said. Haha, small world web site. Reywas92^Talk 20:26, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 January newsletter

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:19, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Academy Award for Best Picture, Conversion from Bullets to Table

It looks like you converted the list of best picture winners from bullet points to a table. There have already been several comments, including one from myself, on the discussion page about this new format. Personally I liked the bullets better. I think it made the Winners and nominees easier to separate, because they had different indentation and winners were bold and italicized. I also think it was easier to visually group each year's nominees together that way, again because of line indentation. Also the vertical length of the article greatly increased from the last edit before you converted to a table, to your edit immediately after the switch to a table. The edit where you first converted to a table took me a little over 45 seconds to scroll all the way through by holding the down arrow on my keyboard. The edit immediately before the conversion took just over 25. To address a pretty negative response to the table conversion (the discussion page has several talk boxes about it and only one person so far seems to like the table better) I am considering reverting the article back to bullet points. But before I did I was wondering what merrits you feel the table has, since you obviously didn't convert it for no reason.Givememoney17 (talk) 03:25, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Article One of the United States Constitution

Thought I would check what is happening here. This article is still listed at WP:GAN as needing a reviewer, but you appear to have started a GA review last December. The review page says "more to come", but there's nothing been added for some weeks. I have concerns about the article, but do not want to buy in until you have been through it. Let me know, and can you tag it at GAN as under review? Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 03:59, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

No, you are welcome to take over there. Sorry I never got back to that. You may do what you like and close when you think is appropriate. Reywas92^Talk 22:18, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

That hadn't been my intention, but i can probably manage it. I will post a note at WT:GAN, as normally a second reviewer would not close a GA review opened by a first. Once I've left the note, it would be great if you would leave a post below it saying you are happy to hand the thing on. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 22:39, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

I doubt that's necessary to note it at WT:GAN. You have my permission here, and I left a message on the review page. Reywas92^Talk 22:44, 3 February 2010 (UTC)

Merge of Lincoln cent to Penny (United States coin)

What is your reasoning for merging the text of Lincoln cent to the US penny rather than keeping it as a separate article, with pre-Lincoln designs given primarily only a link? Was this discussed or done boldly? It leaves an oddity that Lincoln cent (what I typed into search) is now one really long table which is essentially useless for the casual reader. Terrierhere (talk) 00:12, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Neither of the two articles was particularly long, so there's no reason to spread the information out. I will work on that article, moving the tables to a mintage figures article. Cheers, Reywas92^Talk 00:17, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

That takes care of Lincoln cent, thank you. While neither article was particularly long, both were good sized. I see what you're saying, but while the Lincoln cent is the most famous US penny, the merge seems to overbalance the article toward the Lincoln, rather than providing an overview of the penny. Terrierhere (talk) 02:20, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

Removal of Merge Tag - Grand Prismatic Spring

Reywas92, there being no additional discussion or support to execute the merge you suggested for Grand Prismatic Spring and Geothermal areas of Yellowstone, I removed the merge tags today.--Mike Cline (talk) 17:25, 7 February 2010 (UTC)

Frank Lebby Stanton

Thanks for your contributions to the article on Frank Lebby Stanton.

Do you have a way to produce an OGG file of "Just Awearyin' for You" with the tune by Carrie Jacobs-Bond? What is needed is an OGG file uploaded into Wikimedia Commons. I can take it from there.

There's a rendition by Evan Williams at http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=13VwpuooB8s which indicates the recording as "HMV no. G.C-4-2158, recorded on Aug 30, 1911"; Williams died in 1918. Jacobs-Bond copyrighted her tune in 1901 as part of Seven Songs as Unpretentious as the Wild Rose. There may be some other recordings of "Just Awearyin' for You" prior to 1923, but I'm sure that the one by Evan Williams is in the public domain. The most widespread and famous recording is by Paul Robeson, but it was done in the 1930s and probably is not free for upload.

Rammer (talk) 03:31, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Here you go! File:Just Awearyin' for You 1911.ogg. It's very low quality, but that's how the Youtube video had it. Go ahead and use it how you like, and please add the right categories to the file and make sure I got the info right. Reywas92^Talk 22:36, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. You are a really cool person to go to that trouble.

If you will, please help me as follows:

- Go to http://cylinders.library.ucsb.edu/mp3s/3000/3824/cusb-cyl3824d.mp3

- Convert that file to Vorbis OGG

- Rename it as <Just Awearyin for You 1911 Spencer.ogg>

- Insert it into Wikimedia Commons

- Send me a message to get it in Wikimedia Commons

That's a version by Elizabeth Spencer, who recorded "Just Awearyin'" for Thomas Alva Edison in 1911. It has to be in the public domain and cannot be protected, claimed, or restricted by anybody. Additionally, the quality is much better than on the Evan Williams recording. Once I have Spencer's rendition in OGG, I can use the Spencer version in a couple of other places. Stuff on or with Williams is easy to find; so it would be good to use this item by Spencer.

I wish I had the wherewithal to convert the file myself. I would appreciate your assistance. And thanks again for the conversion on the Williams rendition.

Rammer (talk) 00:23, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, but I don't know how to do that. I can only download from Youtube. It seems that to save this file you have to pay for Quicktime Pro. Reywas92^Talk 01:53, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Hmmmmmm. I'll see whether I can get around the barrier. This may take a couple of days. Rammer (talk) 02:28, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Okay, Reywas92. Go to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Just_Awearyin_for_You_Elizabeth_Spencer_1911.ogg .

The OGG is now mounted into the following English Wikipedia articles:

   * Parlour music
   * Carrie Jacobs-Bond
   * Just Awearyin' for You
   * Frank Lebby Stanton
   * Elizabeth Spencer (soprano)

I was able to convert the MP3 to Vorbis OGG by use of the following freeware tool recommended to me by that eminent and imminent Southeastern Louisiana University technician William Patrick Borrelli: http://www.dvdvideosoft.com/products/dvd/Free-Audio-Converter.htm .

Rammer (talk) 23:48, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Austin Aztex all-time roster/archive1

Hi, can you follow up on your comment about the article's name at this FLC (note Wizardman's comment at the bottom)? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:37, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, also can you follow up on your comment at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball managers/archive1. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:26, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Also, would you consider capping your resolved comments at the managers FLC? I'm worried that long FLC pages are discouraging other reviewers from pitching in. Thanks again, Dabomb87 (talk) 23:28, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

24 Waterfall salute!

Thanks for your advice on FAC vs. FLC. Waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park made Featured Article today! Dincher (talk) and Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 9 February 2010 (UTC)

List of tallest residential buildings in the world

I have added some more content in the lead section of this article please try to improve the punctuation and grammer of this newly written content.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 16:12, 10 February 2010 (UTC)

Re: Grammy Award for Best Traditional Pop Vocal Album

Were there any additional concerns that needed to be addressed, now that the nominees have all been added? --Another Believer _(Talk) 21:25, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Prod removed

See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Shane Powers (2nd nomination), thanks! Plastikspork _―Œ^(talk) 02:03, 17 February 2010 (UTC)

Hatnote at Meet the Parents

Hello!

I started a discussion at Talk:Meet the Parents about the above issue. Maybe we'll try to get some additional input. Please share your thoughts!

Thanks! Big Bird (talk • contribs) 13:42, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

WP Indianapolis

Hello! WikiProject Indianapolis has recently been marked as inactive, and I know you are a member. A proposal was made on the talk page at WP:INDIANA to demote the Indiapolis project to a taskforce of WP Indiana. If you interested do you care to weigh in with an opinion here Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Indiana#Indianapolis_project_inactive. Thanks —Charles Edward ^{(Talk | Contribs)} 19:17, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Governors of Maine/archive1

I have restarted the nomination because the consensus is unclear. Please check back at the FLC to ensure your concerns have been addressed. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

Final discussion for Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

Hello, I note that you have commented on the first phase of Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Biographies of living people

As this RFC closes, there are two proposals being considered:

1. Proposal to Close This RfC
2. Alternate proposal to close this RFC: we don't need a whole new layer of bureaucracy

Your opinion on this is welcome. Okip 03:25, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 February newsletter

Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata (submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold (submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte (submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular (submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke (submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.

Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:52, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Dresden Frauenkirche

Hello Reywas92. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Dresden Frauenkirche, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: If "Church of Our Lady" is the standard English name, why move the article to its German name? Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 23:33, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Because that's not the standard English name. That would be the literal translation, but that's not how it's done for this proper name. The German is Dresdner Frauenkirche, and the proper English variant is Dresden Frauenkirche. Compare to Munich Frauenkirche and Nuremberg Frauenkirche, as well as the official English website, this BBC article, and this LOC article. Reywas92^Talk 23:50, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, I didn't understand. I took care of the move now. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 00:02, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Reywas92^Talk 00:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Popular page editing

Thanks for that! 2009 World Series actually became a project of mine before it was even a completed series, I just knew my Yankees would be victorious and I had to get it up to proper status (without POV, of course). Nice to see WS winners get that kind of viewership, so many baseball lists languish with the under 100/day crew. Staxringold _talk^contribs 05:10, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

So called

There is a difference between the so called "Cadillac plan" and so called juvenile delinquent; in the former, "so called" introduces a potentially unfamiliar term, but in the latter it casts doubt on the validity of the term as applied. The former case takes quotation marks even though the latter does not. -Rrius (talk) 02:12, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

There is a very simple question you are ignoring: will the reader understand what so called is referring to without the quotation marks. In the phrase "raise the threshold for the so called Cadillac plan excise tax", a person unfamiliar with the term Cadillac plan could easily misapprehend that so called refers to Cadillac plan excise tax, when it actually refers to only some of those words. In this case, so called does in fact call for quotation marks because it would be unclear otherwise. However, because you have proven so inflexible on this point, I have removed the words so called, which are really the source of the problems. I trust you will agree that this is superior to both of our edits. -Rrius (talk) 04:07, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Survivor: Heroes vs. Villains

I'm really sorry for my mistake of reverting your edits. As you can probably tell, there is always vandalism on Survivor articles, so a seemingly useless piece of information, although properly cited, might seem like vandalism to some editors (including me that time!). I saw Jeff's request for the fact to be on Wikipedia on the video in the reference, so I added the fact that CBS has deemed it too dangerous to be used again. That seems important enough to remain on the article, and hopefully it will. Thanks! —Untitledmind72 (talk) 21:51, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem, and sorry about my tone. Reywas92^Talk 22:08, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments invited

As an occasional or frequent editor of the Republican Party (United States) presidential primaries, 2012 article, your participation in this discussion would be welcome and appreciated. Thanks.--JayJasper (talk) 18:32, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Medal of Honor recipients/archive2

Hi, can you revisit this FLC when you get the chance? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:10, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 March newsletter

We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. Hunter Kahn (submissions) leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. TonyTheTiger (submissions) currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:20, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Alaska panhandle merger

Hey, we seem to have left the Alaska panhandle NRHP list-article merger discussion unfinished. By my reading, there was consensus for regrouping Alaska boroughs into state sections, but then we didn't implement it i guess, or it was undone. Could you please check in at Talk:National Register of Historic Places listings in the Alaska Panhandle. I'll also ask Nyttend. --doncram (talk) 01:00, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for List of National Parks of the United States

On April 2, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of National Parks of the United States, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 12:03, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

List of National Parks of the United States

		The Original Barnstar
		For excellent work on List of National Parks of the United States. I had long been intending (road to hell...) to clean up the lists of US national parks, but you beat me to it. And you did it farfar better than I ever would. Well done! —Ipoellet (talk) 15:38, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Reverted edit on Jim Moran

I thought I should explain why I reverted your edit to Jim Moran...

1. "Congress" is always capitalized, as it is the title of something. The uncapped version would be used in the sense "the congress" or something.

Other than the fact that this seems to be a self-contradiction, there are both versions in the article. Paragraph 2 of MBNA loan has "member of Congress". Whenever refering to the United States Congress, it should be capitalized: http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/congress.

1. In "for five years between 1985 and 1990" you replaced "between" with "from". "From" would make more sense if you eliminated the first part of the sentence and just put "[he was the mayor] from 1985 to 1990".

He became mayor in 1985 and left as mayor in 1990, therefore "from 1985 to 1990". "Between" is exclusive. How does "for five years" make it any different?

1. The hatnote for the "Congress" section, which has the article about Moran's district as a "see also". The article contains information which could be valuable to the reader which may not be available on the article about Moran.

That's why the article is linked in the very first sentence of that section, the article's lead, the preceding paragraph, and numerous other places (and previously the See also section).

1. In "Sheila Jackson Lee of Texas, and James McGovern and John Olver of Massachusetts; and six other activists," there are two ands between McGovern and Olver. This is grammatically incorrect.

How so? I'd be glad if you can prove me otherwise, but there is nothing wrong with using two ands in a list when used in compound like this. "As well as" is typically used following an "and", like in the article's second sentence. I have also corrected the subject-verb agreement error in this sentence.

You did spot some things which did need correcting, such as the "See also" section, which you correctly removed, in my opinion; and several other small incidents of bad punctuation. I will edit these things out myself as a compromise, and I thank you for pointing them out. ~BLM Platinum (talk) 22:49, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Whatever we come to on these, please avoid things like "the article also wouldn't have achieved GA if it violated MOS," as no article is ever perfect. I have made numerous further corrections to the article regarding punctuation, redundancy, and overlinking. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 00:24, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Waterton-Glacier's hyphen

UNESCO is not an authoritative site; Canadian and American legal usage is as follows:

• "Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park World Heritage Site". Geographical Names Data Base. Natural Resources Canada.
• "Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park". Geographical Names Data Base. Natural Resources Canada.
• U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Waterton-Glacier International Peace Park

Note that this is the name as it appears in the US-Canada treaty establishing the park. Also note:

• "Waterton Lakes National Park of Canada". Geographical Names Data Base. Natural Resources Canada.
• U.S. Geological Survey Geographic Names Information System: Glacier National Park

The hyphen is a way of indication the joining of two separate entities, Waterton Lakes Nat'l Park and Glacier Nat'l Park; its absence implies a glacier named Wateron (and there isn't one, as it happens, though there is a Waterton River - but no glacier of that name at the head of it!). This is also the prevailing map usage, as a glance at a map of either country would show. Either UNESCO doesn't have its game together or has a thing against hyphens; but theirs isn't the most common usage and it's not Wikipedia's purpose to promote errors or "create usage". Please revert your change; I don't have admin power or would have already.Skookum1 (talk) 23:58, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go

First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far. We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns. See you at the finish!

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Opinion needed!

As a frequent editor of American politics, I would appreciate if you put your two cents into the debate over the conservative support for President Obama in Talk:Public image of Barack Obama. Thanks.--Jerzeykydd (talk) 22:49, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 April newsletter

Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to Hunter Kahn (submissions), our clear overall round winner, and to ThinkBlue (submissions) and Arsenikk (submissions), who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants Stone (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 17:38, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive. 661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold. The WP:GAN page started at 110,126 bytes length on 1 April and ended at 43,387 bytes length at the end of 30 April (a 66,739 byte reduction in the page, about 60.6% less). Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days. 63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success. The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less). For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:45, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Olympic medalists in softball/archive1

Wouldn't normally bother you, but I'm not 100% certain what I did is what you had in mind, because everything still looks the same for me (in Firefox). Thanks for the comments, and in advance for taking another look. Bradjamesbrown (talk) 19:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of National Junior Clasical League state chapters

I have nominated National Junior Clasical League state chapters, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/National Junior Clasical League state chapters. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. MisterE2123Five5 (talk) 03:55, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Okay, before we go around mudslinging, I am willing to work this out here as things could get ugly very quickly. My rationale for keeping things separate is simple: If we have 50 pages of information put there, it gets unwieldy. If we could somehow add snippets about each chapter on the page that you created, then we have achieved harmony. I agree that some things can probably be removed, but a lot of those pages really could use a massive expansion as well. I'm not as extremist as MisterE might sound and I'm willing to reasonably compromise. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 04:41, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

How is it extremist and mudslinging to use a standard AfD notification template? MisterE2123Five5 (talk) 04:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

It isn't, but the way you have framed it could be construed as that. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 05:50, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

Re: List of National Parks of the United States

Just wanted to congratulate you on the fantastic work you did with the national parks list. It's great! If you enjoy constructing similar lists, be sure to check out some of the lists at the bottom of this page. Some of the national parks are even mentioned in the US section here. Just thought I would let you know in case you were interested! Keep up the great work. --Another Believer _(Talk) 15:22, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

FYI

When you nominate multiple pages for deletion you can use the same page. For example if you were to nominate "1"-"10" for deletion, you could use "1"s page for the other nine. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 19:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I know that but in this case it seemed more appropriate for each one to be discussed separately. Reywas92^Talk 19:23, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

I can see what you mean but it will probably result in a hodgepodge of deletions of articles, which isn't what you are intending I assume. Kevin Rutherford (talk) 20:32, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

When you nominated all the "National Junior Classical League" state chapters for deletion - which I completely agree with and have said so at each AfD nomination - you somehow missed the Ohio Junior Classical League. That article may look extensive and well sourced, but it isn't. Most of the sources are convention programs and other non-independent material. The only thing I saw that could be considered independent sourcing was their congressperson inserting a congratulatory notice into the Congressional Record. IMO we need to consistently apply WP:GROUP, "Aim for one good article, not multiple permanent stubs: Individual chapters, divisions, departments, and other sub-units of notable organizations are only rarely notable enough to warrant a separate article. Information on chapters and affiliates should normally be merged into the article about the parent organization." And IMO while we should at it we should also delete the article National Junior Clasical League state chapters and the two categories, Category:National Junior Classical League and Category:National Junior Classical League State Chapters. Put everything in one place, at National Junior Classical League, as is done with all other notable national organizations. --MelanieN (talk) 03:42, 30 May 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 May newsletter

We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is Sasata (submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by Hunter Kahn (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Two of last year's final 8, Theleftorium (submissions) and Scorpion0422 (submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to White Shadows (submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 20:52, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

Grab some glory, and a barnstar

Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. monosock 18:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)

Reviewer

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, will be commencing a a two-month trial at approximately 23:00, 2010 June 15 (UTC).

Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under flagged protection. Flagged protection is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial.

When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.

If you do not want this userright, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time. The Rambling Man (talk) 16:07, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Aqua regia

Why do you believe that it's incorrect to enclose "noble metals" in quotation marks? As per Quotation mark#Signaling unusual usage, I firmly believe that this qualifies for usage, especially with the words "so-called" as a descriptor. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 19:22, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

When you use "so-called" as a descriptor, it is utterly unnecessary and redundant to use quotation marks. [2], [3], [4]. Reywas92^Talk 19:26, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

That's quite likely the first time anyone's ever proven me wrong in grammar. Thank you for that; it's always good to learn something new. –Schmloof (talk · contribs) 21:00, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 June newsletter

We're half way through 2010, and the end of the WikiCup is in sight! Round 3 is over, and we're down to our final 16. Our pool winners were Ian Rose (submissions) (A), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) (B, and the round's overall leader), ThinkBlue (submissions) (C) Casliber (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (D, joint), but, with the scores reset, everything is to play for in our last pooled round. The pools will be up before midnight tonight, and have been selected randomly by J Milburn. This will be the toughest round yet, and so, as ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Though unaffiliated with the WikiCup, July sees the third Great Wikipedia Dramaout- a project with not dissimilar goals to the WikiCup. Everyone is welcome to take part and do their bit to contribute to the encyclopedia itself.

If you're interested in the scores for the last round of the Cup, please take a look at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Round 3 and Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Full/Round 3. Our thanks go to Stone (submissions) for compiling these. As was predicted, Group C ended up the "Group of Death", with 670 points required for second place, and, therefore, automatic promotion. This round will probably be even tougher- again, the top two from each of the two groups will make it through, while the twelve remaining participants will compete for four wildcard places- good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17

2006

This is nice; it would be good if the 2006 article could be adjusted similarly. — Timneu22 · talk 17:17, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Why the reversion?

Why did you revert my correction to List of National Monuments of the United States? As best I can tell people started calling Fort Moultrie a "national monument" back in the 1980s, but it never was so established by any legal means. Therefore, calling it "Fort Moultrie National Monument" in the text is erroneous. The U.S. Mint is not calling it an NM [5] (see 2016).

In 2002, there was a bill [6]" to rename the site "Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Historical Park," but it does not seem to have gotten anywhere. — Eoghanacht ^talk 11:53, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Because until you moved it the article was located at Fort Moultrie National Monument and I wanted to make clear why it is not in the table. "Fort Moultrie National Monument" appears many times across the web as well as on the NPS website. Reywas92^Talk 14:31, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Yes, but...

• That website is self contradictory. The title is "Fort Sumter and Fort Moultrie National Monument" (singular). But one photo caption does state "Fort Moultrie National Monument". Yet at the bottom it states "Fort Sumter National Monument and Fort Moultrie." It is only evidence of confusion when that page was written.
• The NPS website for Fort Moultrie (http://www.nps.gov/fomo) now redirects to Fort Sumter's page (http://www.nps.gov/fosu). So it seems they have figured out their mistake.
• I did not bother to globally change references to Ft. Moultrie on every Wikipedia article, mostly from laziness, but it seems wrong to me to perpetuate the misnomer in an article about national monuments, which is why I changed on that article in particular.
• It is not in the table because it is not a actual national monument, not because it is an administrative subunit of another.

Maybe the best solution is to delete the entire last sentence of the second paragraph. — Eoghanacht ^talk 21:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)

Pifeedback

Could you give your opinion on Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard#Pifeedback.com?ChaosMaster16 (talk) 14:20, 7 July 2010 (UTC)ChaosMaster16

AG Akerman

Hey! Back in March you reverted an edit to the United States Attorney General. Someone there had removed the Georgia state of residence for Amos T. Akerman without explanation. You just put it back in. I encountered the same User talk:98.216.247.50#AG Akerman today via a more recent edit which also had to be reverted. There's more to the story you can see over there if you want but, in short, I took up what may have been his/her goal though I took a different tack. I added "; born and raised in New Hampshire" to the Georgia listing. Given AG Akerman's ultimately unique (I've learned, through all this) North/South role after the war, and his pre- and during-war story, the unique dual listing seemed reasonable on the AG page, though it does I know stretch the definition of the residence column.

I thought I'd see if I could head off another quick reversal, by you. We'll see how it all flies.

And I don't know yet what popups are, in your explanation, but I will. Hope they don't have a direct bearing, here. Meanwhile, thanks. Cheers. Swliv (talk) 17:42, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

The edit I reverted was unexplained removal of the next AG, George Henry Williams. I don't know anything about the home states, but the format is just to the the primary one, not where they grew up. Popups is a useful Wikipedia tool that allows for speedy reversion and linking. Reywas92^Talk 19:12, 14 July 2010 (UTC)

Request

Hi Reywas. Last January, you brought the list United States congressional delegations from Indiana to Featured list status. Now another list in the series, for Utah, is at FLC: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/United States congressional delegations from Utah/archive1. Considering that you have experience with these lists, do you think you could review the Utah list (only if you have the time, of couse)? Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:14, 25 July 2010 (UTC)

Sorry I could not get to it; I have been on vacation. The article looks great! Reywas92^Talk 15:27, 3 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 July newsletter

We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by Sasata (submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants ( Sasata (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by Casliber (submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to Hunter Kahn (submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:45, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

National historic sites/parks

Hello. You recently removed the merge tag from National Historic Site (United States) with the edit summary "there's a difference". I restored the merge tag, if only because there was a short discussion about the proposed merge over at Talk:National historic park (you may not have been aware of the discussion because the merge tag at the historic site article pointed to the incorrect talk page). I am not familiar whatsoever with American historic designations, so I don't have a strong opinion either way about the proposed merge, but it would be great if you could add your two cents over at Talk:National historic park since you appear to have some background knowledge of the subject. Cheers, --Skeezix1000 (talk) 13:21, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Minnesota Mr. Basketball/archive1

Hi Reywas, can you revisit this FLC when you get the chance? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 21:55, 7 September 2010 (UTC)

Apologies for the unnecessary bump, I must have missed the support among the text. Thanks anyway for capping your concerns. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:56, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

Deaths in 2010

With all due respect, the existing mantra of "Only those meeting the Wikipedia notability guidelines are listed, with a reference to a reliable source" is clearly NOT true. Plenty that fall outside this criteria regularly appear. I am aware you are presently only trying to enhance the wording for those attempting edits, BUT.... anyone can edit makes your additions almost meaningless.

Sorry, I am largely on your side, BUT ....

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 00:08, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

I did not add the part that you quoted, I just added some clarification that mostly repeated what was already below. In my opinion a person must have an article before they can be listed on the deaths page, but unfortunately many non-notables are added in hopes of someone else creating an article. Reywas92^Talk 02:41, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 August newsletter

We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.

• Pool A's winner was Sturmvogel_66 (submissions). Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
• Pool B's winner was Casliber (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
• Pool A's close second was Sasata (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
• Pool B's close second was ThinkBlue (submissions). Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
• The first wildcard was TonyTheTiger (submissions). Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
• The second wildcard was White Shadows (submissions). Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
• The third wildcard was Staxringold (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
• The fourth wildcard was William S. Saturn (submissions). Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. Geschichte (submissions) only just missed out on a place in the final eight. Resolute (submissions) was not far behind. Candlewicke (submissions) was awarded top points for in the news this round. Gary King (submissions) contributed a variety of did you know articles. Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions) said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. Arsenikk (submissions) did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to Ian Rose (submissions), who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to Stone (submissions) for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:14, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

HSE Schools

FYI - Your description of the current configuration of HSE schools including a "middle school" is incorrect. According to the recently updated district web site, there is both a junior high and an intermediate school located at Riverside on Eller Rd. The two schools (named Riverside Intermediate and Riverside Junior High) even have seperate distinct street addresses. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 99.172.132.203 (talk) 02:46, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in the Peoria Unified School District

I'm starting some individual AfDs for certain articles in Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of high schools in the Peoria Unified School District. You may be interested in taking a look on the September 6 log for some of these. The New Raymie (t • c) 03:32, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

RfC on Featured List Criteria section 3b

Hello. There is currently an RfC in progress at Wikipedia talk:Featured list criteria#RfC - 3.b review in progress regarding Criteria 3b of the featured list criteria and whether it should be modified or eliminated. As you participated in a previous discussion regarding Criteria 3b when it was first introduced, this discussion may be of interest to you. –Grondemar 16:13, 16 September 2010(UTC)

Am I missing something?

I could not fathom the reason for this edit. I corrected a typo in the file name, of course, only after the file itself was renamed. You reverted my edit, and sent the file back to a redirect with the incorrect name. In fact, after you reverted me, a bot went ahead and did the exact change I did. Am I missing something here? Was the edit I did somehow controversial or non-standard? --Muhandes (talk) 09:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, I did not know the file was renamed. It originally had a misspelling, and automatic spellcheckers had previously corrected the word but broke the image link on multiple occasions. With a renamed image I now see that my reversion to your edit was unnecessary. Reywas92^Talk 21:48, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter

We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. TonyTheTiger (submissions) leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by Sasata (submissions) with 1175 points. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:08, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Happy Birthday

Wishing Reywas92/Archive 11 a very happy birthday on behalf of the Birthday Committee! Armbrust ^Talk _Contribs 14:41, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Recent change to Periodic table (standard)

I just undid your edit which made Periodic table (standard) into a redirect into Periodic table. The latter transcludes the former so redirecting created a loop and broke that and all other pages including either table.--JohnBlackburne^words_deeds 19:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, I have converted it into a template so that it may be transcluded but is not a redundant article. Reywas92^Talk 19:32, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Children's Museum Backstage Pass

Hello. I just saw your recent edits on the TCMI article and noted you're local to Indy. Did you see this? Wikipedia:GLAM/TCMI/BackstagePass HstryQT (talk) 01:42, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I did, thanks, but unfortuantely I have school. Reywas92^Talk 14:49, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Question

This is a bit belated, and I apologize; is there a specific reason you reverted my edit to Harrison Schmitt a few days ago? Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 01:57, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

It does not make a difference on the appearance of the article and is unnecessary markup clutter. Reywas92^Talk 16:44, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for explaining, I suppose it depends on the size of your screen. At any rate, and undo with an edit summary would have been more appropriate. Tyrol5 [Talk] 18:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Counties of Romania/archive2

I've replied to your comments. Nergaal (talk) 02:37, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

I've fixed the last issue you raised. Nergaal (talk) 03:52, 27 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to TonyTheTiger (submissions), with 2260, and third to Casliber (submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows (submissions), William S. Saturn (submissions), Staxringold (submissions) and ThinkBlue (submissions). Also, congratulations to Sasata (submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is Casliber (submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Staxringold (submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular (submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is TonyTheTiger (submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Candlewicke (submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:10, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation

		The WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation
		Awarded to Reywas92, for participation in the 2010 WikiCup. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 08:59, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Regarding Children's Museum cat

Hello. I just wanted to let you know I responded to the deletion request here: Category talk:The Children's Museum of Indianapolis. I'm a perfectly reasonable person, but "Um"s are not necessary. I'm in the midst of trying to show a class of grad students as well as this particular museum that Wikipedians are nice and worth working with, so it'd be great if you could be kind. Happy to do whatever makes the most sense regarding the category. Thanks! HstryQT (talk) 23:28, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

Governors of Kentucky

Thanks for noticing the work I've done on this topic. Only recently did I begin to believe I'd ever complete it, although it's going to take some time to address the issues raised in my failed GA nom of John Y. Brown, Jr., especially considering the recent arrival of my daughter! Still, I think I can make it to GTC sometime early next year.

The inconsistencies you mention have been a bugaboo in several of my GA and FA noms, as everyone seems to prefer a different way of presenting citations. I've also become a better Wikipedia editor in my 6+ years, so that accounts for some of it too. I do plan to clean this up at some point either before or during my GTC run, but I'd value your advice on how to standardize. The method I've grown to prefer would start with "See also" as a second-level heading if necessary, although very few would probably have such a section. Not sure who added the History of Kentucky links in the See also section on some of these articles, but I don't really think it belongs; I was just too lazy to remove it before! Next would be "References" as a second-level heading, followed by the {{Reflist}} template. After that would be a third-level heading for "Bibliography", under which would go the full bibliographic information for my sources. (You can see this style at Paul E. Patton.) Following that would be a second-level "Notes" heading for any explanatory notes, such as those in Richard Hawes; I like using superscripted letters to denote explanatory notes and superscripted numbers to denote references. Next would come "Further reading", if necessary, as a second-level heading. Finally, there would be a second-level heading for "External links". It seems the External links sections frequently, but not always, include links to The Political Graveyard and Find-A-Grave. Are these standard fare, and should they be? Thanks for your advice. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 23:37, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

50 State Quarters

Hello. I noticed that you recently edited the 50 State Quarter article. You removed the clickable map and separate sections as well as the mintage information. I agree with you that the separate sections and map are probably unnecessary, but you seem to misunderstand mintage figures. The reason the proof mintages are the same is because all were issued within one set each year. As such, all proof and silver proof mintages will be identical for one year. I can provide references for that fact if you're interested. Have a nice evening.-RHM22 (talk) 21:01, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Edit: Nevermind. I've added the SF mintage figures along with references.-RHM22 (talk) 01:16, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination for deletion of Template:Expand

Template:Expand has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. 134.253.26.6 (talk) 22:59, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Kentucky Governors GTC

Since you expressed interest on my talk page, just wanted to let you know that Kentucky Governors is now nominated as a GTC. Acdixon ^{(talk • contribs • count)} 15:15, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Of Presidents and postage

There's a discussion about that new stamps section in Benjamin Harrison on the talk page, if you'd like to add your opinion. --Coemgenus 03:02, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

I've made a compromise proposal for this little argument. I'd be glad to hear your opinion, if you have time for it. --Coemgenus 12:20, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

United States Senate Democratic primary election in Pennsylvania, 2010

Hey Reywas. I saw you made some edits to United States Senate Democratic primary election in Pennsylvania, 2010. As you might have noticed, I've nominated that article for GA. I'm not sure if you're a GAN reviewer or not, but if you are and would care to conduct a review, I'd certainly appreciate it. Naturally, I'm not looking for a guaranteed pass or anything, but simply looking for a straightforward review and am ready and eager to address any feedback you might have, whether negative or positive. Let me know. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 06:30, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Redirects for deletion

Since you were the one who asked the redirects be left in Wikipedia:Bot requests/Archive 32#Simple article moves last year, you may want to comment at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2010 December 23#July 1, 2005. Anomie⚔ 05:45, 25 December 2010 (UTC)