This page 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. |
Although you had no obligation, you kept a close eye for the entire nomination (even after your review) and helped us many times. I have no words to tell you how much I appreaciated what you did. Thank you very much for everything. I mean it. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 18:13, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
On 24 February 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Rosendale Village, New York, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the 1977 dissolution of Rosendale Village (pictured) in Upstate New York was viewed by its mayor as a work of conceptual art? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist (talk) 12:02, 24 February 2011 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | ||
For outstanding work on Rosendale Village, New York and proving that we could easily have good articles on the smallest of US settlements. Your work writing articles like this is extremely well appreciated. Please continue to develop others in the same way! Good luck with the GA!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:05, 24 February 2011 (UTC) |
I have reviewed this article and placed it on hold. Thanks, Racepacket (talk) 06:44, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
Why did you move these articles? They are already using endashes, you're making them unspaced, which is not what is used in other station articles, such as Times Square – 42nd Street (New York City Subway).
The others you moved are supposed to use endashes, I've moved them to be spaced. Please revert the 3 above.— Train2104 (talk • contribs • count) 20:00, 26 February 2011 (UTC)
An editor has asked for a deletion review of File:Stover at Yale book cover image.jpg. Because you closed the deletion discussion for this page, speedily deleted it, or otherwise were interested in the page, you might want to participate in the deletion review. TCO (talk) 10:18, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Gyrobo! Since I enjoyed a lot your exceptional and careful review of Empire of Brazil, I was wondering if you could take a look at Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil? Don't worry about its size, unlike Empire of Brazil this article is very small and I don't believe you should have much trouble reading it. I would really like to see you taking a look at it and helping me improve its prose. If you're not interested, don't mind. But if you are, the nomination page is here. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 14:25, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments at the Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil FAC. I have implemented most of your suggestions. In a few cases, neither the original nor suggested wording seemed to convey the meaning very well, and I've reworded a bit differently. Go ahead and change those yourself, if they still seem too awkward. I will leave a comment on the FAC talk regarding 1 or 2 other things that may or may not be a problem. • Astynax talk 06:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
Wow... I'm really amazed at what you've done for the HV portal. AFAIK, it's one of the most "full" portals on Wikipedia in terms of the number of content selections, which is quite the accomplishment for our little area here. :) I think the more images the better, so here are some of my personal bests, which you might want to look through to see if any are worth adding.
Let me know what you think. Juliancolton (talk) 20:36, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for warning me about the discussion. I agree 100% with you. Although I didn't like Nikkimaria's insinuation that I was trying to force an ending to discussion. This editor declined to tell me and the other nominator what he/she saw in the article that is wrong or that could be improved. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 19:40, 24 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for the update. No problem about space, as far as I know. If you want to leave it up, you might snag some more reviewer comments (from additional reviewers, I mean); it sometimes happens. Finetooth (talk) 05:48, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
A tag has been placed on Template:Layout engines requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section T3 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is a deprecated or orphaned template. After seven days, if it is still unused and the speedy deletion tag has not been removed, the template will be deleted.
If the template is intended to be substituted, please feel free to remove the speedy deletion tag and please consider putting a note on the template's page indicating that it is substituted so as to avoid any future mistakes (<noinclude>((transclusionless))</noinclude>).
Thanks. mabdul 19:14, 25 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for putting those Church pictures in the list. I wasn't sure when I would have time to order them correctly. Appreciate it. Best, MarmadukePercy (talk) 20:12, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi, I think I answered your questions at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/La Stazione/archive1#SilkTork. If you feel that your issues have been resolved, please indicate an unambiguous support. I'm sorry if this comes off as curt, but the nomination has been open for two months and I believe that if the reviewers don't specify their level of support, it may be archived at this point. --Gyrobo (talk) 00:53, 31 March 2011 (UTC)
Four Award | ||
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on La Stazione. |
You definitely deserved this one. upstateNYer 14:40, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Four Award | ||
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Rosendale trestle. |
Jeez, this too! upstateNYer 14:53, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
I trust your script more than my fingers and toes.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:51, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Gyrobo. I looked at the ongoing FAC discussion just now, and I think I'll stay out of it. Two different editors have opposed on similar grounds, and the mention of the peer review seems tangential to the main issues. My advice would be to take the reviewers' advice about the MoS questions unless you have strong grounds for disagreement. The MoS issues are usually not terribly hard to fix. Finetooth (talk) 02:05, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry I came late to this one too. I honestly didn't see anyone claiming explicitly that you hadn't fully addressed the issues I brought up in A-Class review, but it seems they are mentioning the same ones. And they're right.
My quick suggestions for some of the things you could fix: you don't need all those "sights" in the infobox, most of which aren't actually on the trail itself (save the Rosendale trestle). I don't think you need so much in "hazards" ... I suspect that's in the trail infobox for more serious things like hypothermia on the Crawford Path, or difficult river crossings or steep fall-inducing sections like the trails up the Maroon Bells). That would help you address the image sandwiching in the first section.
You also still have the problems suggested by the WP:CITEBUNDLE link. And Truthkeeper is also right about "that sentence with so many numbers". Be mindful of summary style in intros ... it's a too-frequently–overlooked guideline. I try to use only those numbers most germane to the subject (i.e., in this case, the trail's overall length), and leave the rest for the body text. It would be easier on the reader simply to say that a 2009 addition effectively doubled that. Daniel Case (talk) 00:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Hello, Gyrobo. I don't care about date styles in Wikipedia as much as I did previously. So, please feel free to fix them; I don't care as long as no other issue is involved.
I think I had a historic discussion about this issue with another user but I don't remember who. (I must have deliberately chosen to forget at the eve of the new year.) The important thing however is that the discussion ended without any results. So, have fun editing. Fleet Command (talk) 15:31, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on your two new featured articles. I have not seen such a rapid move from article creation to FA status before. It was fun to be a part of it. Racepacket (talk) 11:22, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
I am a Wikipedian, who is studying the phenomenon on Wikipedia. I need your help to conduct my research on about understanding "Motivation of Wikipedia contributors." I would like to invite you to a short survey. Please give me your valuable time, which estimates only 5 minutes. cooldenny (talk) 19:57, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Looks good. :) - I just tossed that reference as the book is no longer in my collection and found a new article from the Milwaukee Journal which is sufficient.Mitch32(Can someone turn on the damn air conditioning?) 23:43, 14 April 2011 (UTC)
Bling! Bling! Your controversial edit in Internet Explorer 10 is reverted, per WP:BRD. A talk page entry is opened. Fleet Command (talk) 06:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
If you don't reply we will revert. Jasper Deng (talk) 20:34, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
I've completed my observations, you can see them here: Wikipedia:Mediation Cabal/Cases/2011-04-16/Internet Explorer 10. —James (Talk • Contribs) • 12:46pm • 02:46, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Gyrobo. I wanted to let you know that Princess Maria Amélia of Brazil is now a Featured Article. You did a wonderful review back there that certainly helped (a lot) improve the article. I'm and truly grateful for that. I must confess that I considered inviting you to join the team and work on another articles related to Brazil's imperial history (if you had the interest, of course), but I had some serious issues with another editor at the end of the FAC process that made me realize that my time could be expended in other far better ways than here. Nonetheless, I thought you deserved to know that I regard you as a valuable editor and one that could do a great work. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 12:16, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Thank you! It is taking awhile reading the articles you and others have been busy working on while I was gone. Great work! Impressed greatly. Look forward to learning more interesting facts added to articles.Camelbinky (talk) 23:21, 18 April 2011 (UTC)
Do me a favor and take a look at Empire State. I realize it's short and has few sources, but after some significant searching, I've only been able to find one author that has actually tackled this topic. Milton Klien wrote both the book I cite and the entry in the Encyclopedia of New York State, which essentially duplicates his work in the book (i.e. citing the encyclopedia would be redundant as it offers no new information or insight). Quite honestly, it's about as complete as it could be and I'd like to bring it to GAN. upstateNYer 03:18, 19 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Gyrobo! I was wondering if you would have the interest of taking a look at one of my old Featured Articles, José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco. I believe the text could be improved and you've proven yourself to be one excelent reviewer. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 22:03, 24 April 2011 (UTC)
Hi Gyrobo - I just wanted to clarify that I never accused you of anything, neither here or off-wiki. It was very clear from my talk page and userpage activities that I was having a problem, and it would have been easy to find. I didn't want to post the Twitter post on AN/I because I didn't think it was necessary and as it happened someone else found it. At any rate, based on recent posts to the thread on AN/I, it seems that some still think I might harass you - so I'm here to let you know that won't happen, and hasn't happened. Obviously it was a huge misunderstanding. I would, however, in the future advise you to stay away from AN/I. Had you come directly to me, I would have explained. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:00, 25 April 2011 (UTC)
Left you a few examples at User_talk:Keraunoscopia#Church_paintings. – Kerαunoςcopia◁galaxies 11:14, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
On 30 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Joppenbergh Mountain, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 1937, the slopes of Joppenbergh Mountain were coated with borax for a summer ski jumping competition? You are welcome to check how many hits the 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. |
The DYK project (nominate) 18:04, 30 April 2011 (UTC)