User talk:Belovedfreak/Archive 12

Archive 5

←

Archive 10

Archive 11

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Speedy deletion

Okay, thanks for informing me on that. :) EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 19:12, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Again, thank you for the information. I'm still getting used to using the Twinkle tools, so I appreciate the advise! EnDaLeCoMpLeX (talk) 19:20, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Black Chicks Talking

On March 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Black Chicks Talking, 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) 00:04, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Evelina Haverfield

On March 8, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Evelina Haverfield, 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) 18:03, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Using Popups to Disambiguate

Hi Belovedfreak! I noticed that with this edit to the Jim Gianopulos wikiarticle, you used Popups to disambiguate mogul to business magnate. I often use Popups, primarily to revert heavily vandalized wikiarticles to clean versions, but was unaware that it could also be used to disambiguate wikilinks, something I have heretofore done manually.

I’ve looked at the documentation for Popups, and can find nothing on performing this task. Would you mind telling me how to do it? Thanks! — SpikeToronto 22:28, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Hi — when I hover over a link that goes to a disambiuation page (like mogul), at the bottom of the popup is a list of green links and it says "Click to disambiguate to..." I click on the green link I want to link to and then it goes through to a preview, which you have to let load & show changes and then you click save. Let me know if you can't see the green links - I can't remember if I installed an additional script or something, so if that doesn't work for you, I'll try and remember! --BelovedFreak 22:34, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks Belovedfreak for the response and for the {{Talkback}}! Anyway, when I hover over a wikilink (like mogul), I only get blue links. I do not get any green ones accompanied by “Click to disambiguate to…” Perhaps you had to add something to User:Belovedfreak/monobook.js to get it to work? Unfortunately, there is so much there, and I am not the best at decoding the code, that I cannot figure out what it might have been.

If you should remember, please let me know. It’d be great to being able to use Popups for disambiguating. Thanks! — SpikeToronto 22:49, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Did you install popups or have you just ticked the box in your preferences gadgets? If you just have it in gadgets, this may be the clue because I installed it separately before they put it in the gadgets. Have a look at Wikipedia:Tools/Navigation popups if you haven't already. I think the relevant bit in my monoscript is

// User:Lupin/popups.js

importScript('User:Lupin/popups.js');

popupFixDabs = true;

...I think! --BelovedFreak 23:14, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

 Done  Thanks! You steered me in the right direction! I went to Preferences|Gadgets and unticked Navigation Popups. Then, I went to my monobook and added

{{subst:navpop}};

popupFixDabs = true;

saved the page, cleared the cache (CTRL-Refresh), and voilà! there they were, the green links. Thanks again! If I can ever return the favor, please do no hesitate to ask. — SpikeToronto 03:59, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome - glad it worked! --BelovedFreak 11:18, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

With this edit, I made my first use of Popups to fix a disambiguation. Thanks again! — SpikeToronto 18:54, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

Cool! :) --BelovedFreak 19:17, 12 March 2010 (UTC)

AFD metrics

I added a couple of sections to the bottom of User:Marc Kupper/Notability FAQ that may answer your question on AFD/Natasha Mostert. --Marc Kupper|talk 22:39, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

WP:SILLIWILI

	The SILLIWILI
	Congratulations, this "SILLIWILI" is hereby awarded for finding the Silliest wikilink of the month of January 2010! You may read the judge's comments at WT:Linking.Ohconfucius ¡digame! 07:54, 30 December 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for the links and I deleted the request because it was like... homophobic (I have nothing against homosexuals) but I thought why do they have LGBT musicians category and not a serial killers category, it seemed to be that you only wanted to show the good LGBT people. But that's OK, thank you and sorry. --190.178.132.152 (talk) 20:40, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem - I had nothing to do with deleting the category, or creating it in the first place, just noticed that there were some discussion about it. Regards, --BelovedFreak 20:45, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Modular/Distributive Lattices

A link to a short document providing equivalent statements of modularity/distributivity was recently dismissed as spam. I do not understand the reasoning behind this. Surely you cannot argue that the document has NO merit. The material is directly relevant to the article. If you think it has LITTLE merit, then the "Related Links" section is precisely where it belongs. If you think it has MUCH merit, then it should have been incorporated into the article rather than deleted. Austinmohr (talk) 04:06, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Replied at Talk:Distributive lattice.--BelovedFreak 08:52, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Laryngeal cleft

On March 25, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Laryngeal cleft, 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) 02:22, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Films March 2010 Newsletter

The March 2010 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 03:45, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Don Black

I went and added a couple sources for that; somehow I jumped right over that section myself. As of this writing they're citations #28/31/32 that work with the hook (31 is online and should confirm anything in the hook). Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 22:35, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Remidus E. Kissassi

That's o.k to delete i doubt you'll find anything subsnative.--Briaboru (talk) 05:10, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Tanzania out of scope

When removing a Tanzania tag from an article in one of the listed categories (i.e. Category:Settlements on Lake Tanganyika), you might consider adding the following so Xenobot does not visit it again for the project.

{{bots|deny=Xenobot Mk V}}<!-- WP:TANZ -->

Thanks! –xeno^talk 12:42, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, will do! --BelovedFreak 12:43, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Timeline of Tanzanian history

On April 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Timeline of Tanzanian history, 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) 18:03, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Renaming nomination of Category:Lesothan people stubs

For your information, stub categories should be nominated at WP:Stub types for deletion, not at WP:Categories for discussion where you nominated Category:Lesothan people stubs (Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2010 March 27#Category:Lesothan people stubs). עוד מישהו Od Mishehu 12:24, 8 April 2010 (UTC) Ok, thanks for letting me know.--BelovedFreak 12:26, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: Halloween II (2009 film) / references

Well, I didn't know it was used for that purpose too. Though I have wondered if you could somehow un-italicize works that shouldn't be in italics. Good to know. :-) I would revert my edit but don't want to cause BIGNOLE anymore editing conflicts. lol —Mike Allen 00:18, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm working on cleaning the article up. Thanks for the comments. I'm trying to find replacement sources for those dead links, but I may have to remove the info if I cannot find anything (which would be a shame). As for the reception section, the requirements are "broad" and a general overview of what critics say is "broad" to me. If I fill out the reception section that it'll go into a comprehensive look, which is the eventual plan anyway. I mean, I can fill it out, but probably not until this weekend when I have the time to really work on it (I've had the reviews already picked out for some time now).  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 00:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

So would Bloody Disgusting, ShockTilYouDrop, DreadCentral, and other sites like it be italicized? —Mike Allen 02:02, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

@Bignole - I'll comment at the GA review page, to keep it together.

@Mike - I'm not overly familiar with those sources, but generally website names aren't in italics. For example, the Bloody Disgusting article doesn't have it in italics. I think they're along the lines of Rotten Tomatoes, Box Office Mojo, AllMovie etc.Insert non-formatted text here

Thanks for the review.  BIGNOLE  (Contact me) 16:27, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome; good work!--BelovedFreak 16:28, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Santa Claus Lane

Hi, I noticed what you left on my talk page. It's not that I'm unwilling to add more content to the article, I've really just about found everything this article can be expanded with. There's not a lot of background info, it only charted in the U.S., hardly any reliable publication (with non-paid access to their website/an archive) has reviewed it... I'm completely willing to add more content, but I don't know where else to find sources. –Chase (talk) 15:07, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I understand that, but unfortunately as it stands, it's not ready for GA. Maybe that will have to wait until someone can access those sources. To clarify: I will either fail this now, with a suggestion to take it to GA review if you disagree, or I will start a review, but I will be asking you to add something about the article's reception. I will try and help look for sources, but if they can't be found / accessed quickly then it won't be up to GA standard at this time. How would you like me to proceed?--BelovedFreak 15:12, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't think it's fair for an article that has been noted by the other reviewer to meet all GA criteria to fail because there's not information about critical reception. There's nothing in the GA criteria that states reception has to be in an album article. If I was nominating this for FA, you might have a point that it's not comprehensive enough, but indeed, WP:GA? states in its notes, "[Criterion 3a] is significantly weaker than the 'comprehensiveness' required of featured articles; it allows short articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics." I believe that this article is the best it can be with all of the info available. Why should it fail its GAN because it was ignored by critics? –Chase (talk) 15:19, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, which other reviewer? Have you looked in any music magazines for the time it was released? There may be reviews out there that aren't online. And no, the criteria don't mention reception, but a reception section wouldn't be appropriate for all articles. This needs something however. I realise that comprehensiveness is not required, but I don't feel that this article is broad in its coverage. I'm not asking for every aspect to be covered, but all I've found out from that article is how Duff came about wanting to make her first album. Where was it recorded? When was it recorded? Who produced it? DId any other well-known artists collaborate? Did she write her own music? Are they new songs, or covers of old classics? What kind of songs are they for that matter? Christmas albums vary- is this full of carols, traditional crooner type Christmas songs, pop? A few of these points are addressed in the infobox and track listing, but not in the prose. What about the release of the album, and promotion? Did she release any singles from the album?--BelovedFreak 15:34, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

By "reviewer", I mean Ten Pound Hammer, who previously reviewed the article. I'm fully aware that there may be print reviews, but I don't have any such ones to my access and I was not able to find any archives. Where and when it was recorded, no such information is available (I own the album so I have checked the liner notes). No singles were released, and it wasn't promoted to my knowledge.

Trust me, I'm really not opposed to adding extra information - it's just that there's not a lot. A lot of info about this album sin't confirmed in reliable sources. However, I will try to incorporate the available info into the prose. I'll also try and look around again for more sources, but I've done so before and there's barely anything out there. By the way, you don't have to keep leaving talkback on my talk page - I have this page watchlisted for right now. –Chase (talk) 15:54, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok. Although I feel that we will probably still disagree at the end of this process, I can see that you're willing to give it a shot. I will start a review, and see what we can do.--BelovedFreak 15:58, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

If you do start the review right now, please note that I'm in the process of trying to expand the article. –Chase (talk) 16:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I'll work with what there is now, since it's at GAN now. Any changes you make will be taken into account as we go along.--BelovedFreak 16:01, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

I addressed or commented on your GA comments. –Chase (talk) 18:33, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

(←) Could you please take a look at the article now? I went ahead and included two reviews, but I'm very unsure as to their reliability. –Chase (talk) 20:00, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

WP:RS

Yeah, you're right. Thank you... very embarrassing. Feedback ^☎ 00:50, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

No problem! --BelovedFreak 23:34, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Album chronology

Was not aware of this. Will change the chronologies appropriately. –Chase (talk) 19:43, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Ok, no problem. I hadn't noticed that the next one in the Santa Claus Lane infobox wasn't a studio album so I'm glad it came up!--BelovedFreak 19:45, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for informing me of this, that must have been something I skipped over! Anyway, I'm just getting settled back in after a long trip back from the beach; I'll be sure to check out the wikiproject you told me about soon, I haven't forgotten! :) –Chase (talk) 19:55, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Cool. I just think it's worth I try, I just had a similar situation with an article I'm working on, needed a reliable source for a particular fact and someone at the film project was kind enough to look it up in his magazine collection. Just hoping you have the same luck! --BelovedFreak 20:00, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Re: BigCityChefs

You have a pretty fair point, and honestly, criticism isn't uncalled for. To my eye, the situation seemed to be that a relatively impartial article was in the works. The latter portion is kind of operative though. Until or unless that gets rolled out as an article (well, or userpage), I felt premature in jumping ahead and "assuming" what the end result would be. COI editing is to be avoided, that's definitely for certain, but there HAVE been incidents of people writing reasonable, legitimate articles on their groups or themselves. What I brought up to him(?) was more the concern that, should s/he actually wheel this article out "into the open", it's very likely to be assailed, so I felt providing an 'out' of some nature might be better. But, if you disagree with my decision, I don't think there'd be anything wrong with maybe stopping to get a second opinion from someone else, or acting differently on it. I was kinda torn on this, I just didn't want to jump all over something that was still in progress and could very possibly turn out legitimate. As such, I won't be shedding any tears if my decision is overturned. Thanks for being willing to discuss this! - Vianello (Talk) 03:03, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Whoops. Little update. Looks like Beeblebrox (totally understandably) went over my head on this one and put down a spamusername block. That seems reasonable to me. My call on this one, as you probably gathered, isn't one I felt totally certain about. - Vianello (Talk) 03:07, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

patrolling speedies

You were , in my opinion, quite right to remove the speedy tag from Hanna Instruments, but when you do that, you need to remove the "hangon" tag also, because that tag by itself continues to list the article for speedy deletion. (our first line of defense against article authors who remove the tags themselves.) DGG ( talk ) 22:30, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Oh thanks, I had seen the hangon tag earlier but forgotten to remove it. Sorry, will bear that in mind in future! --BelovedFreak 22:32, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Hanna Instruments

Yes, the page was previously deleted, although based on the edit summary, that version may have been less coherent than the current incarnation. - Biruitorul ^Talk 00:28, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, replied at User talk:Biruitorul.--BelovedFreak 09:42, 13 April 2010 (UTC)

Portal mythology

Currently only there is one article in selected myth section, is it possible to add more articles. I can search for myths in Hindu mythology articles. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:26, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, yes ideally there should be more. I've only been editing it in the last week, and that section was already there. I don't know if there are a lot of articles that just describe myths, that are of a suitable standard (ie. B class +). I guess looking through Category:FA-Class Mythology articles, Category:GA-Class Mythology articles and Category:B-Class Mythology articles for myth-specific articles would be a start, to see what we can find. I'll be happy to help with that although I'll be going offline in a minute for 24hrs or so. There are also another 30 or so DYK articles I was going to add, and then I was going to concentrate more on the other sections. Regards, --BelovedFreak 13:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

We can DYK, GA, FA Hindu mythology, Japanese articles too. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:38, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I usually write about Hindu legends. Related DYKs at User:Redtigerxyz/DYK. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 13:39, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I have added some Hindu ones already, presumably part of the Wikiproject. I hadn't realised that the Hindu and Japanese taskforces were part of separate Wikiprojects so I'll look at them too.--BelovedFreak 10:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Can you please assess the importance of Hindu mythology FA and GA articles I recently added to proj Mythology. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:12, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi, to be honest, I don't really get involved with assessing articles for importance. I think it's quite subjective, and I don't personally have any use for the ratings. I have no problem with anyone else using them, but I would hesitate to make such an assessment myself, particularly in a project that has such a wide scope as mythology. I see you've made a request at the project though, so hopefully someone else will help. I haven't forgotten the portal by the way, and will be adding some more stuff to it.--BelovedFreak 12:29, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of The X-Files (film)

The article The X-Files (film) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The X-Files (film) for eventual comments about the article. Well done! –– Jezhotwells (talk) 12:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, and thanks for the comments. I will bear them in mind to improve it further.--BelovedFreak 12:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Double Bullseye

An article that you have been involved in editing, Double Bullseye, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Double Bullseye. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Sottolacqua (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Buy or Sell

An article that you have been involved in editing, Buy or Sell, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Buy or Sell. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Sottolacqua (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

AfD nomination of Clearance Sale

An article that you have been involved in editing, Clearance Sale, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Clearance Sale. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Sottolacqua (talk) 01:03, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the help. Wwmargera (talk) 13:45, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Cheryl Cole

Hello and thanks for your helpful comments on the article's peer review page. You've given me some good ideas on the direction I should be taking the article, so I'll start working on it in the next few days and hopefully should be able to address the issues that have been raised. Thanks once again. Best wishes Paul Largo (talk) 20:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'd be happy to have another look later if you like.--BelovedFreak 20:50, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

That would be great. Cheers Paul Largo (talk) 20:59, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

GAR

I have begun a GAR for the Santa Claus Lane article and you may wish to add your commentary. –Chase (talk) 21:42, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Hersheys!

Reconsider the static has given you a Hershey Bar! Hershey bars promote WikiLove through chololately goodness and hopefully this one has made your day better. Hershey bars are wonderfully delicious! Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a Hershey bar, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

Spread the goodness of Hershey bars by adding {{subst:Hershey Bar}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message!

. -Reconsider! 09:41, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

It sure is, anything with caffeine. Anyways in case you're wondering, this wasn't done at random, I've seen you doing rounds of the recent changes log. -Reconsider! 09:54, 23 April 2010 (UTC)