User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 6

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Dabomb87. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 4

→

List of Governors of Bombay

Thankyou for your comments at the FLC. The List was promoted. Kensplanet^T _C 07:17, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Ernie Reyes Sr

I think it would be best if you look at what you're unblanking before you unblank it. That article is a bunch of unverifiable, unreferenced garbage written, probably, by the subject of the article. I'm sure a lot of that information is good, but until somebody does the work of finding out what it is, it shouldn't be there at all. 200.27.146.116 (talk) 18:05, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Recordz

Haha. I did, on January 23rd :P--TRU CO 01:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. I was just leaving messages at everybody's talk pages of the WP, I didn't really pay attention to who they were. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

It's cool man.--TRU CO 01:45, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Since you notified me, I responded to what you stated here. You think we can notify reviewers about this, since it affects them as well?--TRU CO 01:55, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Happy Dabomb87/Archive 6's Day!

User:Dabomb87/Archive 6 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as Dabomb87/Archive 6's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Dabomb87/Archive 6!

Peace,
Rlevse
~

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:48, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

A very belated thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 20:55, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

USMA FAC, thanks

Thanks for helping out with cleaning up the lengthy list of comments on USMA's FAC page. I'm just not experienced enough yet to understand how to navigate through the protocol of such a lengthy set of issues and concerns. I realize that SandyGeorgia must be overwhelmed by the amount of dialog, but as I just posted at the bottom of the page, support is running 5-1 for at this time, and the 1 object has had his concerns addressed, but has yet to strike those concerns. Thanks again for taking your own time to clean up the FAC page. I really appreciate it and I'm learning from watching your edits. Ahodges7 ^talk 02:23, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem! The article is important and is worth the effort. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:24, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I left my extensive comments on Saturday, today is Monday. Please do not rush me. I was in the process of adding comments and strikes when you left your "note". This is not a process to be rushed and I am sure SandyGeorgia wouldn't mind an extra few days or even week. We are working on quality here. 02:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, Sandy had requested. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I replied to Sandy. KnightLago (talk) 02:35, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I have struck and replied with comments. Please let me know if you have any questions. KnightLago (talk) 04:29, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Fair use image question at FAC

Thanks again for your edits and support at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3. A question on the fair use image has arisen and I am asking for your input to try and reach consensus. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:32, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I caught that on my watchlist and was going to head over there in about ten minutes. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 15:33, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks very much and sorry to bother you here needlessly. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:03, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: ECW

Thanks for letting me know, I hopefully can get a review by Rambo. I don't want to ask WP:PW members because of WP:COI. Thanks for letting me know also about the poker list, I revisited that nom.--TRU CO 21:16, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't think that just asking for a review from WP:PW is a COI, as long as you do it in a neutral manner. Anyway, it doesn't matter now that Rambo reviewed it. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:18, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

Saxbe fix

The edit summary remarked on comprehensiveness. See FAC discussion for explanation.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:34, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: GANs

I've got three up, but only Mario Kart DS has a chance at FAC as the other two are Simpsons episodes, and well, per Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Day the Violence Died/archive1... Gary King (talk) 04:01, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

For Mario Kart DS in particular, the Development section is short. If you can find more information for it, please let me know. Gary King (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I was just going to say something along those lines. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Most are just useful for Gameplay; not as many for Development. However, the interview looks interesting; I will see what I can dig up. Gary King (talk) 04:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Hi

Hello, I am new. Could you give some tips on editing the Wikipedia, if I am so moved to? God'sGirl94 (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2009 (UTC) moved from User talk:Dabomb87/Barnstars

Thank you very much. You have been a great help to me. --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:03, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement. I will need it for fear I could be kicked out. How do I avoid that? --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:10, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Just remember to stay civil and treat everyone with respect. Always cite your sources and discuss controversial changes on an article's talk page. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Excuse me, but I cannot seem to edit the Horses page. I found a couple things that I needed to fix, but I can't find the edit button. Do you know where it is by chance? --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:13, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Horse is semi-protected—that means only users who have had their account for more than four days and have ten edits can edit those pages. Read about it here. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Horses

Thank you for that tidbit. I will work on getting to the point where I can edit it, because I found info on there that was very wrong. --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay...could you explain it again, it doesn't make too much sense. My brain is fried in the morning, which is bad. --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:26, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO MUCH for your patience with me. I'll get the hang of it...eventually. --God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I did?--God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep! Dabomb87 (talk) 15:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Yes. On my watchlist page, there is (diff) what does that mean?--God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

A diff shows the difference between two versions of a page. See Help:Diff. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:33, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh. What is Adopt-A-User? I saw that and was curious.--God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:35, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

More details here, but basically it is like a mentorship between experienced editors and new editors. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:36, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh. I will ask how, but I will go and see myself, just so I don't seem dumb.--God'sGirl94 (talk) 20:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Record Charts

Hi, I don'y know if someone invited you before, but since you are helping the project a lot lately, I thought you may want to join. Frcm1988 (talk) 18:11, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

I'd like to invite you to join the newly formed Record Charts WikiProject. There are a lot of Record-Chart-related articles on Wikipedia that require attention, and I hope this project can help organize an effort to improve them. So please, take a look and if you like what you see, help us get this project off the ground and a few Record Chart pages into the front ranks of Wikipedia articles. Thanks!

Premiere (The O.C.)

First, thanks a lot for your current copyediting and second, I have suggested a solution to the additional problem. However I did come here to ask a quesion. I notice your removed a period from publisher=Warner Bros here. As it is an abbreviation I guess your removed it because it gives a double period in the reflist (Warner Bros..), if this is the case should I go and do this for all the other references publisher by Warner Bros.? Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:47, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

My Page

Pardon me, but how do you add stuff to your "home" page?--God'sGirl94 (talk) 21:28, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Do you mean user page? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:29, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

yes--God'sGirl94 (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Just edit it. What do you mean by "add stuff"? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:30, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

thnx--God'sGirl94 (talk) 21:37, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Just a heads up

Be on the lookout for any of these guys. This guy already "protested" the changes of number-ones lists (to the tables with images) and left some rants on the Project Talk Pages: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Record Charts#Format changes from lists to tables. Basically what he is doing is reverting the articles, then copying all the text (in its old format) and creating new articles with a variation on the name, like "List of 2003". If you place warnings on his page, he'll then copy all the contents onto your talk page and on his talk page and on his user page, wherever he can put it. I've had to block and also give full protection to his pages and delete a number of articles he created; it's ridiculous. Soooo... just be on the lookout, check User Contributions, report to AIV, whatever. Later! - eo (talk) 23:14, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah thanks, I think found one more—User:Cheesecups. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:17, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer review

Hi there, Thanks for your advice on my Featured List nomination for List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK) - I believe that I addressed all points but noticed the review had been archived. I wondered if you could have another look at the article as I have put it in for peer review before renominating it. Thanks. 03md (talk) 11:30, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I will look at this later today. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:12, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you also look at peer reviewing Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/List of Metroid media when you get the chance? I want to send it to FLC soon. Thanks! Gary King (talk) 20:55, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Done the Metroid list PR, ~~{{doing}}~~ done the other. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:28, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm currently working on Brain Age 2: More Training in Minutes a Day!. If you have time, could you peer review it at it's peer review and/or copyedit it? Or at the very least, could you take a look at its Gameplay section? I tried to make it as least confusing as possible, such as the part where brain age is explained. Gary King (talk) 03:30, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I spent a few hours cleaning up the article, so I decided to bring it to GAN. You now have the option of either giving it a full peer review or reviewing it for GAN :) Gary King (talk) 21:03, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

William Henry Harrison

Any help copyedting this for FAC prep would be greatly appreciated. — Rlevse • Talk • 21:52, 5 February 2009 (UTC)

Mario Kart DS

Oh, I was talking to Gary King, but okay; I understand now. Tezkag72^{私にどなる}_{私のはかい} 03:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Pigs might fly

The whole affair is so totally nasty, but I add comments each time when I come back. The last time I came back fresh, I found a quiet spot to bring in a little humour. Ever since a saw a cute picture of a piglet which Tony1 had on his talk page, I've been kinda inspired... Of course, not necessarily everyone will be amused, and some might even squeal, but you could call it a defense mechanism on my part. Of course I'm supportive of you and the work you do with FAs. I think the Tennis expert has been deliberately provocative and vindictive by proposing those punishments, and I hope ArbCom sees through his hypocrisy. Ohconfucius (talk) 14:12, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Tony (talk) 14:22, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks to both for injecting some color into a dull day! Dabomb87 (talk) 23:53, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: List of Toronto Raptors head coaches

Sure, why not. I'll help out with the peer review, but don't take more than 4, since I would like Chrishomingtang to also peer review some. So yeahh...go ahead. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 01:21, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

FARC

Quick question: am I allowed to post my comments in the FARC commentary, or should my comments here stay in the section above? Ohconfucius (talk) 02:16, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

It should be in the FARC section. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:43, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Tx Ohconfucius (talk) 05:17, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

thank you. what do you know about frank lloyd wright?--God'sGirl94 (talk) 15:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tropical Storm Kiko (2007)

Just wanted to let you know that my concerns have been addressed, so feel free to revisit/reinstate your support. Cheers, –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:09, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah. I see. well, I have to write an extra credit paper on him and wondered what you knew.--God'sGirl94 (talk) 16:11, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay. How do I archive my messages?--God'sGirl94 (talk) 16:18, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Atorvastatin

Hi, first of all thank you for your comments, and about the citations, i created most of the article, and i added more than 85% of its citation, but all this appear as one edit because i created a draft on my subpages, and copied it immediately, please check the page history on this link, the only major part i didn't edit is Atorvastatin#Market, i created all the other parts, thats why i can take comments and reviews of the article, anyways, please give me some advise about how can i improve the article to at least a good article, i guess its worth that, again thank you for your time Maen. K. A. (talk) 22:25, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Please reply to my message on my Talk Page.

Sure! I think it would be good if you set up a peer review for the article. Then, you can ask editors who are knowledgeable in medical subjects to peer review the article and give advice for a future GAN and FAC. I will also try to help out. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:29, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

thank you, i ll set up a peer review, and thank you for pointing that.

Maen. K. A. (talk) 22:36, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Black Eyed Peas discography

Can you give this a source review, I was about to support, but I'm a bit skeptical about some of the sources. Thanks.--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 22:52, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

I am reviewing the article right now. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Cool.--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 23:01, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

That's what I thought as well, I will wait until your comments are completed and then I'll see where I'll take it from there.--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 23:19, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Can you also revisit WT:FLC#Consensus discussion?--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 02:06, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2008 Humanitarian Bowl

The dates in all of the sources are all still in international format.--2008Olympian^chitchat 03:35, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:38, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: 2008 Humanitarian Bowl FAC

You're not being unreasonable at all. While I was going through the article, I found it a touch wordy at times, and you obviously agree. Some may consider the comments picky, but I don't. Those "picky" issues are what seperate very good articles from our best work, and I encourage you to keep finding and commenting on them. Giants2008 (17-14) 03:42, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that is reassuring. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:43, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

You are both certainly entitled to your opinions, and I welcome and will carefully consider any comments or constructive criticism. By the same token, I am not simply going to agree with stylistic differences out of hand. I'm not trying to be obstructionist. Those "picky" comments (as you call them) do not in fact separate articles. They highlight differences of writing style, not "brilliant" or otherwise writing (and I think its a little hyperbolic to characterize any truly encyclopedic prose as "brilliant"). You may think that other bowl articles are "more refined" (whatever that means), but if you compare them using the readability tools you will see they are very similar, particularly in metrics that measure "wordiness" (e.g., 1.52 vs. 1.59 words per syllable and 19.55 vs. 19.18 words per sentence; [1] & [2]). In my opinion, the article is at least as good as the other FA bowl articles. Thinking I was mistaken, I revisited one of those (2000 Sugar Bowl) and picked a random place to read:

"Virginia Tech received the game's opening kickoff in their end zone for a touchback, and the Tech offense began at its 20-yard line. On the game's first play, Tech committed a five-yard false start penalty. Running back Shyrone Stith was stopped for a loss on the first non-penalty play of the game, but Tech made up both that loss and the penalty when quarterback Michael Vick scrambled for 25 yards and a first down."

I don't mean to insult anybody, but that is not, in my opinion, "more refined" (or less "wordy" or more "brilliant" or "crisper") than the text in the article in question. I also don't think it is particularly relevant to compare two articles. Strikehold (talk) 16:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

the "hearing"

I find it odd to have to pose these questions, here and here. Tony (talk) 14:12, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I had a question for Ryan also. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

FLC preload

Can you find the pre-load template for FAC, I can't seem to find it so I can create a test page for the FLC one.--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 16:31, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Alright. Here is the page, here is the diff where Gimmetrow added the preload. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:39, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

So we should add that diff from Gimmetrow into the FLC talk template? Also, is the message in the preload (the one that is on top of the edit box that states like the rules for FLC noms) located in that same page?--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 16:48, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

What is the FLC talk template you speak of? Dabomb87 (talk) 16:52, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

I meant the one that goes on talk pages {{FLC}}. Oh okay, so will those be affecting all current noms as well?--TRUCO ⁵⁰³ 17:11, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Question re: Internet Movie Database (imdb.com)

Hi there, just thought I would ask you a quick question. Is IMDb.com generally considered a reliable source? I would love to use this link as a source citing awards and nominations for Danny Elfman. I know you are involved with many peer and FLC reviews, so you may some insight on the matter. If you are not sure, no prob! Just thought I'd ask. Best wishes! -Whataworld06 (talk) 21:32, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: IMDb: I generally don't consider it a reliable source, and I doubt it would be considered such for the purposes of citing awards and nominations. See Wikipedia:Citing IMDb. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:03, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I will just use the page for research, but cite reliable sources upon finding them. Much appreciated! -Whataworld06 (talk) 22:05, 8 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

See barnstar page 05:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Rufus Wainwright discography

Thank you for your feedback. I hope I've corrected all issues and concerns addressed in the FL nomination. The only outstanding issue is the source for the Hell soundtrack, which I made a comment about here. If none of the sources listed are reliable, then I can delete the entry (or feel free to do it yourself). Thanks again! -Whataworld06 (talk) 05:29, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I went ahead and removed the entry. If I come across a reliable source for the Hell soundtrack contribution, I will add it at a later date. I hope all other issues are resolved! Thanks again for your comments and help! -Whataworld06 (talk) 19:47, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Was wondering if there was anything else I needed to do to the article to earn your support. I didn't see a response from the changes made, as mentioned above. Also, if you have an opinion on the references/sources debate that is currently taking place, your additional perspective would be much appreciated. -Whataworld06 (talk) 17:35, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Scheduled Monuments ion Greater Manchester

Thanks for your review, the only issue I was unable to resolve is finding a page number for one of the images. You're right, it should be present, however I no longer have the book and it will take at least a week to get hold of it. Thanks for your time, Nev1 (talk) 00:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Premiere (The O.C.) PR

Hi, I have added a bit more reception per David Fuchs. Could you just quickly check the additions before I follow your suggestion and get a completely uninvolved editor to take a final look. Thanks, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 20:15, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at that. I've made a request to Scorpion0422 , asking him to do a final once through. Thanks for your help and i'll let you know when this gets to FAC. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 23:32, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock

The article is at FAC now. Mind giving it a final copyedit to see if there are any other problems? Gary King (talk) 20:43, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Midnight Oil discography

Can you please clarify on the FLC comments page as to whether all your comments have been resolved as it is unclear what your position is regarding this candidacy and am concerned that it will impact on the final determination. Dan arndt (talk) 01:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Commented at the FLC. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:23, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Appreciate the prompt response - have left message on Drewcifer's talk page & am awaiting a response. Thanks again. Dan arndt (talk) 01:30, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Proposed at ArbCom

(Perma-link)

Proposal to end this all

Greg L (talk) 04:31, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Dude, any reason you haven't enabled your email facility? Tony (talk) 11:25, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

I will. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:17, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

You think this is an exception to the 10 limit rule?

WWE Draft? I plan on adding fields like "first pick, location, date, venue, format, and the addition notes" In addition to expanding the prose substantially.--<TRUCO> ⁵⁰³ 02:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Lol, I'm a talkpage stalker. Anyways, I think it isn't a exception just because it has time to progress. Other lists that cannot be progressed any longer and has around 8, 9, 10ish are exception, but again, for this one, I don't think so. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 03:41, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Extra! Extra! Read all bout it!

Even Rubin and Cole say Tennis expert has lost it. Ohconfucius (talk) 12:30, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm now extremely concerned that he may be repressing his anger, which may lead to severe problems down the line. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Seinfeld (season 2)

You weak opposed 11 days ago but the nominator seems to have addressed your concerns. Does your oppose still stand? Scorp and I would like to close it before the end of the day, otherwise it will be open until Wednesday. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I am still not satisfied with the prose. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, could you say as much at the nomination? Cheers! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I should have done that. However, it was archived before I was able to return. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:54, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Please don't archive discussion

Please don't archive discussion on the workshop page. I'm going through it at the minute and it's something that should be left to a clerk. People have already reverted you on some of your movements which should suggest that people aren't happy about what you're doing. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. Won't happen again. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

TRM

Thanks for your message. Don't worry. He's been trying to stay in touch throughout his world tour, but some places are just a bit too remote, even today!

He's bound to be back - I promised him I'd work with him on getting John Wark to FA when he returns, and he knows how much I, as a Norwich fan, detest John Wark. That alone should be enough to trump any reluctance he has at the end of his wikibreak! --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

FLC - List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK)

Hi, I have answered all your queries on the review page - there are now no redirects and I have given my opinion on one of the external links. Could you check the review page again and let me know what is happening. 03md (talk) 09:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I gave my input, I see it as a bit questionable.--<TRUCO> ⁵⁰³ 16:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you check the FLC review page again - I have changed the external link requested and hope that everything should be fine now. Thanks for all your help. 03md (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Review

Hi, could you please check if your concerns about the article Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine have been addressed? Your feedback is most welcomed. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

List of United States Naval Academy alumni

This is sort of long, and there are dozens more that could be added, so I’m not sure what to do with this. It still needs work with things like formatting; first only linked, consistency in dates 1999-2000 vs (1999-2000), verbiage, etc. West Point would be even worse, Air Force, CG, and Merchant Marine not so bad. I hope to get to FL, maybe even a featured topic. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Respond here: User_talk:Rlevse#Re:_List_of_United_States_Naval_Academy_alumni please. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

See three ? there. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Reasons

I have added some data at the discussion pages, but without any answer or given reason, they have been deleted. I propose that a reason is given for each deletion, in top of the deleted text, or in the History Records.. --Dagofloreswi (talk) 04:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

An example

D'oh!

Yeah, I forgot. I'm using AWB at the moment and I'll do some closures in about 20 minutes. Thanks for the reminder. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 00:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I need to revisit the older FLCs real quick. Hopefully, I can finish in time. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I can give you some more time if you like. Just let me know when you are done, then I'll do some closures. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 00:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Real life has been busy, and the date arbitration case has sapped most of my Wiki time. I shouldn't be long, there is only a couple FLCs that are ready for pr/ar that I haven't revisited. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/BBC Sports Personality of the Year Lifetime Achievement Award

Maybe...forgot to watch that =.= I'll do it by 8:00UTC. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:List of wind farm projects in Romania

Done. I would oppose it due to that note that state's some of the most important, but I may be misinterpreting it. The lead also doesn't say much about the list itself.--TRU CO 01:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Popotan episodes

I believe I have resolved it with that last citation.じんない 05:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Before I resubmit the article, I'd like to know if the database is fine for the entire timeline given that it gives the first and last dates shown and says it aired every Thursday. I don't believe that would constitute original research to basically look at a calander and confirm that Thursday was those days.じんない 22:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't either, but you may want to ask that question on WT:FLC just to be sure. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

After some talk with RR and with no input at all from FLC talk page, I'm not sure what to do. I have removed the mention of not having promotional items in the English DVDs (which was one of his criteria for not passing), however I'm not sure how to deal with the airdates. Considering I have done multiple exhuastive searches in both English and Japanese for any variance in air dates and found not one mention, that the cite I'm using is considered by Penn Library as among the highest academic databases of its kind and it lists the days as thursdays and does not mention a change in scedule which appear on some of its other articles I do not know what to do. I do not have access to the print sources for daily listings of showtimes in Japan. The main website for the anime and the TV network cannot be sited because the former is defunct and the latter does not archive it's history. Any other reliable source just lists the dates for the first and last and if anything else thursday and the time of day. Unreliabe sites like fansites, wikis or blogs are the only sources that list other dates.じんない 01:44, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

The fact the official site is defunct does not make it useless. See some of my recent findings here. Rambo's Revenge (talk) 09:19, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Philadelphia Phillies first-round draft picks

I have to say that I respectfully disagree that there is no good reason to change the font size of the key, and no, I don't think it's necessary to change the others. One, we aren't making robot lists, and two, I believe that the table is more visually appealing (per Cr.6) with a smaller key because it draws the readers' eyes downward to the main thrust of the article. Honestly, I see no reason why keys shouldn't be at the bottom as clarifiers, but the top is always the way it's been done, so I continue that way. On the team seasons lists, the playoff keys are usually noted in a small font, which was my first FL and is why I continue to make small keys. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Rufus Wainwright discography

Well, unfortunately, the discography was denied FL promotion. I have no problem with Drewcifer's opposition, but I am still not sure about the best solution to the sources issue that was raised. I have asked him specifically what I can do to earn his support when I re-submit the list for FL status, and I hope you will provide me with your support once again. If needed, I can let you know when I re-submit the list. Thanks again for all the assistance and suggestions you have provided in the past! -Another Believer (talk) 02:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I am busy and will come back in about 10 hours. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

FLC fix

Thanks for fixing the malformed FLC I created. I was fixing it in the "review" I added but you beat me to it by a few minutes. :) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Willowtip Records discography

Forgot this? Canniba loki 03:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks!

Canniba loki 04:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

List of United States Naval Academy alumni topic samples

Would something like this be okay for say the astronaut section:

Astronauts

or just what template should I use there? Should I put any sample astronauts or just list them all in the sub article?

template is now sortable, Gadget850 updated the code for me. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I am busy and will come back in about 10 hours. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I also don't see where the Waterloo list has its notability criteria, for me, they have to meet wiki article criteria and actually have an article. The question about what template to use to link to a sub article and do I need to list any sample alumni in the main article remains too. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that you could include the most notable astronauts, with a {{main}} link to the subarticle. It could be difficult to determine which are the most notable, though, so maybe you could include the first 5 or so in alphabetical order? –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 03:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I think I'll go with that plan, name the subpages ".... (Topic)" like the astronaut one above, with 5 sample grads on the central list with a main link to subpage with the full list of astronauts (or whatever). Any more input, please post on my talk page. Thanks for the help to all. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Let me know if you need any help. –Juliancolton ^Tropical ^Cyclone 16:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Userbox for GA reviews

The userbox {{User Good Articles reviewed}} has been updated so that it can now link to a page in your user subspace where you keep track of all your GA reviews, if you have such a page. This can be done by adding a | and then the name of your user subpage (or subsection of your regular user page) wherever you have the template called. For example, on my user page I am using

{{User Good Articles reviewed|6|User:Rjanag/GA reviews}}

which displays as

This user has reviewed 6 Good Article nominations on Wikipedia.

There is more information on how to do this at Template:User Good Articles reviewed.

Note: If you are not interested in doing this, you don't have to do anything; the template will still work for you exactly as it does now.

Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Bleach chapters

Although truco and goodraise say there are a few grammar issues, the left a weak support until it could be worked. Any idea of what it is? It seems a bit trivial since they left a weak support.Tintor2 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

System of a Down discography

"How about a general overview on the band? See Pendulum discography as an example." Hey! Canniba loki 02:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I fail to see the irony. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Because it does not exist. Just take a look in the page above, and see the difference regarding your suggestion. Canniba loki 02:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

What doesn't exist? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:43, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The irony! Canniba loki 02:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh. I still don't see what is wrong. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay. Canniba loki 02:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

User adding list of stocks to articles

Hi, if you can, could you weigh in on User_talk:Iifacts#Stock_information? A user is adding a list of stocks that Warren Buffett owns to his article (here, here, and here), and so I am removing them. But they added them back again, so before this turns into anything bigger, could you please have a look and weigh in? Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment; Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway could probably use a few more people watching them as him and his company have recently been in the news a few times lately, more than normal. Gary King (talk) 02:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

"A few times" seems below average to me ;) Dabomb87 (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Okay, well I will be watching both Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway indefinitely starting last night, since they both seem to fall into disrepair over time. This was what Buffett's page looked like just 24 hours ago, and this was Berkshire Hathaway. Yikes. Gary King (talk) 02:59, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Regarding this, I think you spoke too soon. Gary King (talk) 03:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

That was his 3rd revert. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:15, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I think WP:3RR is worded so that you need to be more than three reverts. Anyways, this is giving me a headache. I rarely bring anything to ANI, but I guess this might have to go that way—or 3RR. Gary King (talk) 03:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I know, it was just a heads-up. ANI may be a bit premature, an uninvolved admin might be better first. Your call. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:21, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't know what an admin would do, if I just asked them to take a look like I did with you. Gary King (talk) 03:23, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I can take that, I just ultimately don't want to bring this to ANI if I don't have to, but it might just be easier than continuing this. Gary King (talk) 03:24, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Wait a long time and then revert it a month or so later? Gary King (talk) 03:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

← Wowwee wow wow. COI much? Gary King (talk) 04:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Warren Buffett

To Dabomb87: it seems that you are in charge here...the stock info is up-to-date and verifiable (SEC.gov), I will maintain that. Removing stock holding info from Warren Buffett's page is doing a disservice to the readers.

Also, it's no right to have one person dictating the page. Gary works hard but it does not mean he did something right and useful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Iifacts (talk • contribs) 02:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3

	<font=3> Thanks again for your edits and support - Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3 made featured article today! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/Bauhaus discography

Hi Dabomb87, I've made some changes to Bauhaus discography based on your comments at the FLC. Please feel free to revisit to see if you have any further comments to make. Thanks, --JD554 (talk) 10:38, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Metroid media

Explain to me the two points I didn't understand in your comments. igordebraga ≠ 21:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review request

If you would like to peer review the Spokane, Washington article, the editors of the article would appreciate that. If your up to it, tell me here or on my talk page so I can stop looking for reviewers. Thanks! Anon134 (talk) 23:18, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I will see what I can do, but I probably won't get around to it till early next week. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:22, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

OMG, A BARNSTAR!

See barnstar page 02:15, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

LOL. Me neither, copy-edit for me! :D -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 02:24, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of African American United States Cabinet Secretaries

I have replied to your comments on this FLC, could you take a look? Thanks—Chris! _ct 03:34, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

FAC query, dabchecks

Dabomb, it's going to take me hours to catch up on FAC, as there is a lot of work I usually do when FACs are new (I have to go through 50 FACs at once now). Would you be willing, interested to go through each FAC and add either {{DABcheck}} or a note that dabs are OK? You've been so helpful, so often, that it occurs to me that you may be able to help with this part. I only got through the first three FACs, since Wiki was down a lot of the day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

No problem. If I see any other MOS problems, I will note them. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you SO much ... I have quite a backlog. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:55, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ! I'll resume again in the morning. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:53, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Peer Review of Origin (band)

Thanks for commenting on this article. You're the first person to comment on any article I've submitted for peer review! I've responded to your comment; feel free to inquire further. Huntthetroll (talk) 05:52, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of current NHL captains and alternate captains

All of your comments should have been addressed. If you can, please return there and cap off the resolved comments. Thanks, iMatthew // talk // 23:37, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Removing GA template

Just wondering why you removed the GA template on Eastbourne. I reverted back to an earlier version to remove some vandalism, but did not know if there was a reason the GA template was removed. MortimerCat (talk) 14:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

GAs don't have the GA symbol transcluded like FAs do. If you look at what links to the GA template, only Eastbourne had the GA symbol transcluded. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:16, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

colwidth

{{reflist|colwidth=30em}} doesn't break in browsers because in a browser with a small resolution, it will typically show the references in two columns. The colwidth determines dynamically how many columns a browser will see depending on its width. Gary King (talk) 02:25, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the clarification. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:26, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

It was probably a 1280x900 screen. 1280 pixels width and up produces three columns; I'm seeing four columns, at 1680 pixels width. Gary King (talk) 02:36, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I don't use Windows at all. Gary King (talk) 02:42, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Edit Summaries

In your haste to undo some of my work on Great Tew within two minutes of my putting the article online, and then to undo some of my work on Thame, Lower Heyford and Bloxham, you seem to have overlooked the fact that the rubric for an edit summary says Briefly describe the changes you have made. "Severely overlinked" is not a description, it is a criticism based on an opinion. I find it at odds with your instructions to fellow-Wikipedians (not requests, I note) to Be polite / Assume good faith / Avoid personal attacks / Be welcoming. A message on my talk page would have been a more civil gambit. Motacilla (talk) 17:48, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Want to be my partner-in-grime?

I went to WP:ER and my god it was a huge backlog which I cleared some. But to avoid having that happen again, want to help me like "run" it, like with the archiving?--TRU CO 19:12, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm a bit busy, and sick to boot, but I will see what I can do. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Oh, hope you feel better. But I meant like afterwards. I cleared the backlog. Right now noms over there are from this year or from last yr without reviews. Once you feel better you do you want to like help me with the archiving from then on.--TRU CO 19:29, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I just reviewed one editor, I have archived a couple others. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Great. You think it would benefit if we created a new archive for just 2009 and leave the old ones in their current place? Also, how about adding {{polltop}} and {{pollbottom}} to archived noms?--TRU CO 19:36, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

We might discuss this at WT:ER first. I think it would be better to use {{Discussion top}} and {{Discussion bottom}} instead of "poll". I have to go somewhere now, will be back later. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

The thing is that place is dead really. But I'll place a topic there.--TRU CO 19:42, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I could really use your input over there in those discussions.--TRU CO 03:29, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

2008–09 Clemson Tigers men's basketball team

Hey I was just curious as to why you changed the types of dashes used in the article in only some places and not all instances? Thanks! Jober14 (talk) 13:33, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

I use a script to convert the hyphens to en dashes, and it only works in certain cases. I will try to fix the rest later. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 01:15, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Adventures of Mini-Goddess episodes

If it would be possible, could you please take a look at List of Adventures of Mini-Goddess episodes? I fixed the spots you've mentioned and did another copyedit after your comment. NOCTURNENOIR ^{( t • c )} 21:51, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at NocturneNoir's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Peer Review

It seemed like you were interested in reviewing the Spokane, Washington article. If your still interested, could you tell me when you think you will get around to reviewing it? Dont feel rushed, its not a priority and I know your busy, I just wanted to know so I can maybe plan around it and stuff. Thanks! Anon134 (talk) 04:00, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

I have a lot to catch up on, perhaps mid-week? Dabomb87 (talk) 01:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Promotions

Damn, I'm sorry. I guess that's the unfortunate crack in the system we use. I left a message on his talk page asking him to address your concerns as quickly as possible. Thanks for letting me know, Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 15:31, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Luckily. I was editing while this was unfolding, so I was able to respond quickly. Since I don't want to edit the FLC after its archival, I'll run down the changes here.

Did the first two prose changes, which were good redundancy/wordy spots.
The photo link was already in the licensing column. To make it more explicit, I added a link in the summary. This was actually my first edit on my new Commons account.
The external link was suggested by a previous reviewer. It doesn't matter to me, but I wouldn't mind keeping it.
Couple of notes from your changes: first, I removed the hyphens you added, as I didn't think they worked well. I've never seen Major League or American League hyphenated, and while I wouldn't mind "franchise-record", I don't like it as much for "franchise records". Second, the fraction template is causing the fraction to be too large to fit in its box. That might be something of interest beyond this article. Giants2008 (17-14) 15:44, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't really care what happens with the external link. Keep it, nothing is harmed. I don't know why I added the hyphens, it didn't help that much. What do you mean about the fraction being too big? It looks fine to me. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:54, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

It was pushing the 3 to the point that the bottom of the number was not showing up in the area, cutting out the lowest curve. Maybe it's just my computer, but it didn't look right. Were you looking at the current version or one from your edits? Giants2008 (17-14) 23:14, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Just to keep you up to date, I've gotten all of the redirects in List of Olympic medalists in ice hockey and I think Maxim addressed your other concerns. -- Scorpion ⁰⁴²² 19:06, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Walter Price (Worcestershire cricketer)

Hello. Thanks for cleaning up this article; it's appreciated. One small point, in case you clean up other cricket-related articles: "his best bowling of 4/87" is quite acceptable cricket terminology, although "his best bowling return of 4/87" is more elegant, so I've changed it to that. You changed it to "his best bowling showing of 4/87", but the phrase "bowling showing" is pretty much never used in cricket writing. I hope that's helpful, and thanks again. Loganberry (Talk) 00:30, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Actually, it was 4/86. Oops! Loganberry (Talk) 00:31, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/System of a Down discography.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Canniba loki 02:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I already supported that nomination [Reds FLC].--TRU CO 03:13, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Canniba loki 20:23, 1 March 2009 (UTC)