User talk:Kodster/Archives/2008/June

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

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

Contents

June

Pinch, punch, first of the month. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 01:53, 1 June 2008 (UTC)

Peer review limits

Hi Kodster, since you have several peer review requests currently open, I wanted to let you know about the new guidelines at Wikipedia:Peer review/Request removal policy which places the following limits on peer review requests: "Nominations are limited to one per editor per day and four total requests per editor. Articles must be free of major cleanup banners and 14 days must have passed since the previous peer review, FAC, GAN, or A-class review. For more information on these limits see here." This was discussed at Wikipedia_talk:Peer_review#Proposed_limits.

The current requests you have made can stay open (they are grandfathered in), but I wanted to make you aware of the new limits for future requests. Thanks for all your work here, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:39, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Rolling stone

Ill read through and add suggestions on take page, ;-) --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:20, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

LOL - poor Hillary I still want her to win darn it. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 20:43, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

In response to the above. I do believe Obama got the nomination yesterday. As you'll see on my userpage, I support him.:)Xp54321 (Vandals Beware!!!,Contribs) 21:45, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

The Beatles

Hey mate, have to say, the chances of you getting The Beatles article to FA are remote. Ive been trying to keep the article to a hi standard ony for uber beatles fans to insert "Snopes" as a source multiple times even though its a bad source. Your going to have to fight every tooth and nail so it probably wont be worth it, unless you can knock sense into the situation. Im staying out of, I now hoe protective some can be. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 00:20, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Thankyou

Cheers, hope your back at wiki full time soon. I think your article has a real good chance. Ive put another article up too so fingers crossed for the both of us. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 18:18, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

Rolling Stone

Ill take another lookie now and let you know on the article talk page. Yes it has been like a ghost town on wikipedia today, my watchlist has been quiet, ive been busy though setting up the WP:JANET. — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 22:38, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yeah, i think its ready, on inspection. --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 23:34, 7 June 2008 (UTC)

Yay!! Best of luck buddy. Just make sure your here when the review is on lol, not like last time remember. :-) — Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 17:54, 8 June 2008 (UTC)
Wow, that was easy peasy lol, well done!! --— Realist2 (Come Speak To Me) 17:20, 10 June 2008 (UTC)

Like A Rolling Stone

Please see the instructions at Template:Articlehistory; there were a number of problems there:[1]

  1. You had dropped the "1" on "action1"
  2. It's "GAN" for the action, not "GA"
  3. It's Peer review, not Peer Review (note capitalization)
  4. It's "failed" not "fail"
  5. When you build the AH, you should remove the old templates

Hope this helps, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:37, 10 June 2008 (UTC)