User talk:The Rambling Man/Archive 22

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

What do you think of this?

I'd value your input... Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_August_16#User:Childhoodsend.2FBalance_check Especially keen if you think I'm incorrect. --Dweller 16:35, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, well having read the contents of the deleted article, it seems to me to be a veiled attack (without evidence) on other editors. It should remain deleted because of that, however given the volume of debate going on there's a good argument to suggest a relisting on WP:XFD or wherever. I think the DRV consensus is going to be leave it deleted anyway... Sometimes it makes you wonder how much of Wikipedia is dedicated to people arguing about how to argue with each about articles on Wikipedia.... The Rambling Man 17:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Peru national football team

I was just in the process of quick-failing the GA nom for Peru national football team, but upon going to remove it from the candidates page it seems you're in the middle of reviewing it. Ah well, two replies are better than one eh? Oldelpaso 17:43, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Hey dude, no worries, if it's a quick fail then quick fail it and remove my name, no problemo. I only cast a glance at it and wasn't overwhelmed... The Rambling Man 18:09, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

2005 UEFA Champions League Final

Hi, im a little bit too young to understand some of the things you put, could you explain them on my talk page please, thank you in advance El-Nin09 18:37, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, i need help with Citing the Final section El-Nin09 19:36, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Is the footage not a good enough reference? El-Nin09 19:54, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

How about the bbcs clockwatch which references basically the whole thing El-Nin09 20:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Random Smile!

WarthogDemon has smiled at you! Smiles promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by smiling at someone else, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy editing!
Smile at others by adding {{subst:Smile}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

-WarthogDemon 20:02, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Edmund

Thank you for all your help! It is an article we can all be proud of! -- SECisek 21:07, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Ironicly, I chased an anon. IP troll to the Edmund article last week, made an edit or two, got hooked, and here we are! A true Patron, indeed! -- SECisek 21:13, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
I also would like to thank you for your assistance in the GA for the article. One of our anon friends is back (there were three at the last count) and as a person who has been caring for St Ed. for sometime I will rest a while. Look at the talk pages for a history if you wish, I have to admit I nearly lost it a couple of times. Now when it comes to Ipswich F.C.!? With Thanks --Edmund Patrick ( confer work) 13:08, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks

I'm perfectly chill. Just keeping spirits light. The Daddy has been stalking my edits for the past day, reverting changes in several articles he has no interest in simply because I've participated in them. Rather than screw with significant Wikipedia content like the Daddy does, I'm just having a little fun in a way that harms no one. Someday I do hope to achieve satori, when I'll feel no need to do anything at all. Until that blessed state comes to pass... Best, Dan.—DCGeist 21:22, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply

Ah right. I looked through the templates and thought those ones would probably be best try and persuade him to leave my userpage alone and my Wikiproject boxes (he vandalised my page by blanking one of the boxes of a project which I belong to). Would I need to have issued more warnings before going to the last one? - The Daddy 21:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

There is no reasoning with him it would seem, he has now followed me to Ezequiel Lavezzi's football article that I was working on, and he is moving youth club information into the senior club part of the infobox. Sad.[1] - The Daddy 21:39, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
Indeed. This is called giving the Daddy a taste of his own medicine, per the following message I just left with him:
===WP:STALK===
Li'l DyKy, given your concern with Wikistalking, allow me to point out these three edits to you, which constitute exactly that: [2], [3], [4]. As the record clearly demonstrates, you have absolutely no interest in either perfect game or Joseph McCarthy, other than my participation in them. And, of course, your edit in the second of those summaries--"per concensus"--is not only misspelled, it's an obvious lie.
So, as Rambling Man suggests, let's try to get some positivity here. Obviously, we have to begin with you apologizing for instigating the negativity with your stalking and that deceptive edit summary. I'm all ears...—DCGeist 21:47, 20 August 2007 (UTC)
It's a shame that all this has made the Daddy sad. Maybe the Daddy should stop behaving like such a bad little boy.—DCGeist 21:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Britney Spears article

Thanks for your initial review of the Britney Spears article! I would love to hear advice from you on how to improve the article to FA standards. Thanks again. Oidia (talk) 05:29, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Congratulations!

Congratulations, Man! You just won the "I reverted the Vandalism on Dfrg's page" big-ass fish of Glory! Nice work! Dfrg.msc 06:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
No probs. You know, it doesn't really even look like a fish. Maybe some primal flipper thing. "Bloop". Look at that vacant stare, and those beady eyes. Dfrg.msc 07:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
*Cough* --DarkFalls talk 07:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Heh

Beat ya to it :) - Alison ☺ 11:53, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, well you should be working or something!! ;p The Rambling Man 11:55, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Sleeping! It's 5am :) - Alison ☺ 11:57, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I thought you Apple folks weren't sleeping until Leopard was unleashed?!! The Rambling Man 11:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
Rowwwr. Squish them bugz! Won't be long now, from all account. I have it running here & it seriously slick. Loadsa new changes that didn't make the last seed build, so nobody's seen 'em. Tons of cool :) - Alison ☺ 12:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Claudius of Turin

Ready for a second round of suggetions. All initial problem fixed. -- SECisek 12:25, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Ready for a final round of suggetions. All secondary problem fixed. -- SECisek 12:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
BTW, I have not yet looked at Edmund, but another editor informed me that an anon., single purpose, IP belonging to a troll ran wild right after the GA pass. I'll take a look, but I do not want to feed him anything. Hopefully there are some personal attacks on the talk page and we can take action. Ah, the perils of recognition! -- SECisek 12:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you again for your help and suggestions. Any chance of you reviewing Peter of Bruys, which would catch up my back log of GAs and would free me to work other aticles up to GA standard? It is short, simmilar to Claudius, and I have already made changes that you suggested for Edmund and Claudius. Thanks again and it has been a pleasure working with you. -- SECisek 13:13, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Sure thing, I've reserved it already for review, should have first run at it done by this evening. The Rambling Man 13:25, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Talk:Pubic hair

Hi TRM - I am having an issue with User:Nandesuka once again. Consensus went against my photo at glans penis, which is fine, but it is a completely different story at pubic hair. Generally the argument that sexual acts are illustrated, but the body is photographed has won the day on various articles; hence my series of photos of the body (which is only an exceptionally small part of my portfolio). On pubic hair my photo replaced a bizarre and oddly colored male photo to compliment the current female photo. It was discussed on the Talk page, and consensus was reached. Now, two months later, Nandesuka wants the photo down, not replaced. He is currently edit warring, and trying to intone the lame argument that I should "butt out" since I have a COI (an argument that has never held any water, and is typically used so that an editor gets his way). The photo is --once again-- being discussed. Right now we have Nandesuka, who is against it, Geogre, who wants no photographs, only paintings, me, who wants the photo, and Nick Michael, who in the previous consensus voted for the photo. He has been adding witty remarks to the discussion for now, but since he previously voted to include the photo I feel somewhat safe in saying he is not against its inclusion. Based on that, Nandesuka is trying to take the photo down saying that consensus has been reached against the photo. This is admin behavior? Could you provide any assistance? --David Shankbone 14:42, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

While you're helping resolve this conflict I'll stay well out of your hair. <ahem> --Dweller 14:52, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
The situation wouldn't be so hairy if we didn't have an admin running amok, disregarding the twists and kinks of the discussion for his own clipped POV. --David Shankbone 15:04, 21 August 2007 (UTC)
I'll have a look to see what I can do shortly. These pages are a bit unsafe at work...! The Rambling Man 15:06, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

SS Suevic

Thanks for taking the time to do the GA review of this article! I've tried to address all your concerns, and have noted how each was addressed on the article's talk page. If there's more, or if any of them haven't been resolved to your satisfaction, please let me know and I'll do what needs to be done. Thanks again! AKRadeckiSpeaketh 02:05, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 20th, 2007.

The Wikipedia Signpost
Weekly Delivery


Volume 3, Issue 34 20 August 2007 About the Signpost
Bad Jokes, Deletion Nonsense, and an arbitration case WikiScanner tool creates "minor public relations disasters" for scores of organizations
WikiWorld comic: "Tomcat and Bobcat" News and notes: Wikimania '08, 200 x 100, milestones
Wikipedia in the news Features and admins
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News The Report on Lengthy Litigation
Home  |  Archives  |  Newsroom  |  Tip Line  |  Single-Page View Shortcut : WP:POST

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot 04:45, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you

Hi. I just wanted to thank you for reverting User:Whitmorewolveyr's page move of Milan Central station to Milano Centrale station as I just realised that he wasn't an admin, moved the page with no discussion and moved by cutting and pasting and I didn't know what to do. Tbo 157talk 10:26, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I think 31 hours is exceedingly lenient. If he returns disruptively, I'll indefblock and seek a community ban. --Dweller 10:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Peter of Bruys

Ready for another round! -- SECisek 19:19, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, yes. Sorry, but I figured out how to expand the Peter the Venerable list after I message you. So added it all last minute. Good to go. -- SECisek 20:03, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I think we are there, anything else? -- SECisek 20:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Peter of Bruys

Thanks for taking the GA review for this - I had promised the nominator that I'd look at this next, but got unexpectedly landed with a short-notice project at work and didn't get round to it until today... by which time you'd already done the business. Good job ;) EyeSereneTALK 20:37, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Enjoy your holiday. I look forward to working with you to improve other articles in the future. -- SECisek 21:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
@ Secisek and The Rambling Man
Ditto the above. BTW:
  • "hopefully I'm not making too many mistakes"
Maybe we should adopt that as the GA reviewers' motto? It seems highly appropriate...
  • "Big Pete de B": redirect page needed?
EyeSereneTALK 21:21, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm finding GAC a really interesting area; I knew almost nothing about most of the article subjects I've reviewed. As you say though, the criteria are fairly objective so it isn't a problem, and from what I've seen of different reviewers most of us are pulling in the same direction! EyeSereneTALK 21:34, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Re: Revert

Sorry about my quick revert. I guess I thought it was vandalism at first glance. However, I don't need four people telling me about it on my talk page. In addition, as far as I can tell, I have not made many other errors using Twinkle. — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) 21:23, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I accidentally inserted the template without thinking. Again, that was my mistake, and I apologize. — Super-Magician (talk • contribs • count) 21:28, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
Perdon? I didn't think he was attacking me. (Or were you referring to Super-Magician?) Me confuses. D: -WarthogDemon 21:51, 22 August 2007 (UTC)
That's good as I don't want to add to the confusion. =) I'm seriously not even annoyed with him; when I first started out on Wikipedia, my vandalism reverts for the first month weren't always accurate either... -WarthogDemon 21:55, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Mido (footballer)

I think I've pretty much got your comments dealt with. Mattythewhite 22:04, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

I saw that happening, cool. I'm retiring for the evening so if you don't mind I'll recheck tomorrow and let you know what I think. Cheers. The Rambling Man 22:06, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

James Milner

Hi, I think most of the concerns you raised can be dealt with pretty quickly (i.e. less than two days). So rather than quick-failing it, is it possible to keep it on hold first, as it stands now. Thanks. Chensiyuan 01:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

To be 100% accurate, it wasn't quick-failed, it was slow-failed - it had a thorough review and plenty of comments to address. However, I'm not that bothered about relisting it - make your changes and let me know, I'll review again. The Rambling Man 06:22, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

All pionts either done or addressed. Buc 08:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Not so, the fancruft in the off the pitch section persists. The Rambling Man 08:43, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
What if I just remove the last paragaph? Buc 17:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)
Let me know when you want me to look again. The Rambling Man 15:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Copyedit

Sorry... RL interfering, keeping my WP contributions to the trivial. I'll try. --Dweller 09:16, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Na, just busy. If you add the 1990 WC info, let me know and I'll review it. I've now completed up to his return to England, so not that much left. --Dweller 10:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I'm a curious so and so... what was this ([5])? --Dweller 12:02, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
It was a space between the and Republic.... The Rambling Man 12:03, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Ah yes. You sound like an extract from a Star Wars script. --Dweller 12:05, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I've already told you, this isn't the talk page you're looking for... The Rambling Man 12:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
How did Luke Skywalker know what Darth Vader had bought him for Xmas? --Dweller 12:12, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
The old one's are still the best.... he felt his presents... The Rambling Man 12:25, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
That's about all I can do today... I'm already overstretched on 2 deadlines. Enjoy wooly jumper --Dweller 13:38, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Infection alert

Just to let you know, there's been a small outbreak of {{cn}} disease at Bobby Robson. Let's hope it's not too infectious. --Dweller 11:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Go to bed, you nutter. Enjoy your break. I'm off for some shut-eye meself. Night night. --Dweller 22:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
I know, I know. I'll get some of Oldelpaso's comments clear then I'm asleep. Laters dude. The Rambling Man 22:34, 23 August 2007 (UTC)
Yes, I have Kuper's book (Wikipedia:WikiProject Football/Booklist). I've added a small amount to the PSV section. In other matters, your appeal for football GAs just so happened to coincide with my efforts to get Robbie Fowler to said status. Tony Book may or may not follow in the near future. Oh, and I see you were the GA reviewer for History of Stoke City F.C. Could you possibly give your verdict on its FAC, which is very low traffic at the moment? Oldelpaso 09:52, 26 August 2007 (UTC)
After some hunting, I've found the details of the 98-99 final day. PSV won 3–2 at Utrecht after being 2–0 down, the winner in the last minute or injury time [6]. Meanwhile Vitesse Arnhem lost 2–1 to Feyenoord after taking the lead, meaning PSV finished above them on goal difference. However, this is background info, not something for the article. Might be best just sticking purely to the facts and not attributing anything to Robson: PSV missed out on the league title, finishing third behind Feynoord and Willem II, qualifying for the Champions League on the last day of the season. It was a season with a dramatic ending, but something of a salvage job. In comparison to, say, his season at Barcelona, it doesn't merit much coverage. Oldelpaso 17:00, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Welcome back. Good break? Robson's going well at PR... I think you can probably move to FAC. No idea how good you've been about chiming in on other FACs recently, but in all good grace, I'm planning to drop my wisdom on a few over the next few days. Madly busy IRL at the moment though. --Dweller 11:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Lostpedia GAC

Hi there. --thedemonhog talk • edits 19:16, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Further comment added. The Rambling Man 15:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Britney Spears Article

Hello Rambling Man. I hope you enjoyed your holiday. We have made improvements and corrections to the Britney Spears article according to your suggestions. With 3 exceptions. We decided that "Should note that Spears didn't write or co-write Toxic, seeing as it was so successful" should not be mentioned since the article does imply that Spears wrote the song. As with citations need for "At the age of eighteen, she was the youngest person in SNL history to have acting and musical performing duties on the same show." and "She has grossed over US$150 million from tour ticket sales and over $45 million in merchandise from her tours." -- These 2 sentences were removed from the article hence we don't really need references for them. Apart from those, every point from your comments were addressed and improvements were made. I think it's time that we submit the article for GA again. Oidia (talk) 14:30, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, I'll take a look at it for further comment but would prefer to allow another editor to take up the mantle of GA reviewer. The Rambling Man 15:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Thanks. Oidia (talk) 03:29, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Sir Bobby

Sounds good, I'll do my best to help out with the onslaught! Dave101→talk  18:12, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Awesome. I've started the peer review and FAC to follow. The Rambling Man 15:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou

I thought that my I had final editing rights over my own talk page unless an official admin placed the tag. I'm getting beat up over something that seems obviously standard practice on 33% of all other MMORPG articles. Again I appreciate your comments. Alatari 18:45, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome. The Rambling Man 15:16, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

YCFC

Cheers. But its been hard work keeping vandalism off the page all day! Look at this. I mean, who does that? Sigh. And how was your trip to Jersey? Went there when I was two years old but inevitably can't remember much. Mattythewhite 20:14, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Hi there, favour?

Hi RM, I'm trying to introduce User:Danielfolsom to GAC, might it be possible for you to give a particularly careful review of one of the articles they have nominated? Tim Vickers 02:24, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, either Oil spill or William I of England. All the best Tim Vickers 14:52, 27 August 2007 (UTC)
Formal review please, I'm just trying to ensure they get a good review from an experienced reviewer, rather than a "pass" with a list of bot-generated suggestions! Tim Vickers 15:49, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Charlie Macartney

Time for FAC? It seems to be mostly filled out. Unfortunately ALoan is not available for copyediting so it's up to us....Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:47, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Tanker 910

Many thanks for the GA review...I'll get to work on it. AKRadeckiSpeaketh 17:19, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

CSD AutoReason Updated

Attention spamlist! I've just updated CSD AutoReason to account for the new image deletion page. If you'd just hard refresh (Ctrl+F5 in most browsers), you'll get the new version and be on your way. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ^demon (talk • contribs) 17:52, August 27, 2007 (UTC)

Time Enough at Last

Thanks a lot for reviewing the episode page. I've made some changes and responded to your comments and think it's pretty close to GA status. Luatha 20:25, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

GAC Reviewer of the Week

The Good Article Medal of Merit
Congratulations, I have chosen you as my GAC Reviewer of the Week for the week ending 25/8/2007. Epbr123 10:56, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Central Scar News

I was just wondering if it was possible to get all the text you deleted back so when we get more open for the public, we can just edit that then submit it? Ado 'Mortumee 11:10, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

RE:Wowee

Oops, looks like I edit conflicted that, too. Sorry you were offended(?). Just trying to get stuff done effectively, without unnecessary distractions. El_C 12:30, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

No bother, I didn't realise you'd blocked the IP already. Keep up the effective work...! The Rambling Man 12:37, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Thank you! I still have no idea what it was talking about, but it was signing as a user whom it was earlier speaking to, which is odd. El_C 12:39, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Did you know about this bit of kit for biogs?

Wikipedia:Village_pump_(proposals)#Age_of_living_people --Dweller 13:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I believe it's being used in Robson already... The Rambling Man 13:19, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Bobby Robson references

I noticed that you have occasionally used the same page number(s) to reference different points (e.g. pp18-19). Could these be combined into one named re-usable reference with the a,b instances? Just a suggestion. Hope you get the article featured, you've done a really great job with it. --Jameboy 13:25, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

I notice the 2nd Kuper reference just says "Kuper, p68", whereas the multitude of FbnG references give the book name. I'm guessing that one or other is not according to policy. Otherwise, I hope you don't feel slighted by my long copyedit proposal list: it is no more than polishing suggestions, on a very sound article. Kevin McE 16:49, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Glad that my comments were useful for the Robson article and good luck with it. I'm actually quite excited about the prospect of what could be the first (I think) featured article related to The Baggies. Are you going to The Hawthorns next month btw? I should be there, hopefully. --Jameboy 15:55, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Admin coaching

Hey, just to let you know I am still around and have left an update on our admin coaching page. Thanks. Camaron1 | Chris 13:31, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for sorting the Eurovision issue out, that was very helpful. Camaron1 | Chris 13:27, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayern Munich 1 - 2 Norwich City

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Bayern Munich 1 - 2 Norwich City. Am I wrong? --Dweller 14:14, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I found it a tough call too. I've added some cited context/notability claims. --Dweller 14:35, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Having spruced up any reasons for keeping the article, I'm reluctant to improve it further, in case it'll go down the tubes. What's your opinion of it now? --Dweller 15:16, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
They're beautiful. Thank you. --Dweller 15:40, 29 August 2007 (UTC)
Looks like it's the bin for this article. Shame. After some hedging, I do believe it's notable. I'd compare it to the infamous Scotland win over the 66 World Cup winners. Notable for Scotland. Not for England or the rest of the world. But still notable nonetheless, not least for constant citation of it. Meanwhile, Robbo seems to be going well. Sorry I can't help. RL is a bitch - seen my edit pattern of late? --Dweller 12:10, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
Illegitimi non carborundum --Dweller 12:20, 30 August 2007 (UTC)
What I said there ↑ Night night. Come back soon. --Dweller 21:35, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. --Dweller 17:37, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Hello

Heh. I also wasn't too happy with its title at first; can't think of a better one for now. Main thing is that it should be kept, then it can be moved umpteen times a week without any real harm. Attention on Robbo is good, but I'm not sure about Buc/Bole's intentions. --Dweller 21:18, 30 August 2007 (UTC)