Ballpointbiro

Hi!

Just wanted to say I'm really pleased to see these new articles about Coventry buildings springing up! Keep up the good work, and if you need anything, my virtual door is open. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:04, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm really enjoying learning about the local history! I'm working through the list of Grade II* listed buildings at the moment, are there any other areas that need attention? I was thinking of making some pages around the bicycle industry but I think I'll struggle for sources with the library and archive being closed at the moment. Cheers, Ballpointbiro (talk) 12:28, 25 February 2021 (UTC)

I would like to add my thanks for creating the Coventry buildings articles particularly https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coventry_Central_Baths as my father was the principal architect for that project. I have some additional publications from Historic England and newspaper articles that I may use to enhance the content but I am such a novice Wikipedian I hesitate lest I breach some etiquette I am unaware of. Also I intend to create a series of pages for extant Turkish Baths in the UK. Dare I ask if there are any exemplars you would point me to or where I should go to seek guidance. TIA. Markmclellan (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2023 (UTC)

Tagging pages for deletion

Hello, Ballpointbiro,

Every time you tag a page for deletion (CSD, PROD, AFD/CFD/TFD/etc.), you must post a notice on the talk page of the page creator informing them on this tagging. If you use Twinkle and set up your Preferences, the program will automatically notify the page creator which makes things easy. Please consider using it or you will need to start posting notices yourself for every page you tag. Thank you. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:48, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Also, you have no business removing content on the user pages of other editors. Please stop doing this. Liz ^{Read! Talk!} 19:49, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I'm really sorry I massively misunderstood what I was meant to be doing. I have now stopped and won't be doing that again! Ballpointbiro (talk) 19:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, I've activated Twinkle and have re-read the guidelines. Sorry again. Ballpointbiro (talk) 21:12, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for GA review!

I really appreciate that you selected this article to review, and provided me with such helpful ideas for making it better. I've started working through your suggestions, but still have a couple more to work on this weekend. I've added responses to those I've been able to address so far. I hope I understood your suggestion: "The Artifacts section starts with "It is possible that...". The sentence is supported by an inline quotation but I would recommend attributing it explicitly in the sentence." I added "According to Hedlund," to indicate that this information came from that source. TrudiJ (talk) 15:50, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi! No problem, it was really interesting to read. One of the things I love about Wikipedia is finding out about things I would never normally run into. Yeah, that's exactly what I meant. I look forward to seeing it finished! Ballpointbiro (talk) 16:34, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

I have learned so much about aspects of editing from working on the changes you recommended--thank you. I hope the image placement is better now, and the captions more standardized. If you see additional changes I should make, please let me know. I'd like this article to be as good as possible! TrudiJ (talk) 13:40, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you TrudiJ (talk) 16:47, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Geoffrey Kirk review

Hi Ballpointbiro, you may have seen that I've reverted the GA status for Geoffrey Kirk because your review was not thorough enough. If you still want to review the article, I'd recommend starting a new review page via the article talk page so that everything can go according to process. However, don't feel forced to do a second review; I'm sure another editor would soon come around to reviewing the article. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 17:02, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Hi, I just exchanged messages with buihde, and edited the existing review: Talk:Geoffrey_Kirk/GA1. Please let me know if it's acceptable, if not I'll add some more detail. Kind regards, Ballpointbiro (talk) 17:25, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Hello again, I just wanted to let you know that you might need to add the GA icon manually to the article. The bot which normally does this seems to have missed this one. Best, Modussiccandi (talk) 19:13, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Ok, sorted. Thanks again Ballpointbiro (talk) 19:43, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

March 2021 GAN Backlog drive

	The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
	Thank you for completing 5 reviews in the March 2021 backlog drive. Your work helped us reduce the backlog by over 52%. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 13:13, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Belgrade Theatre

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Belgrade Theatre you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alan Islas -- Alan Islas (talk) 15:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Belgrade Theatre

The article Belgrade Theatre you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Belgrade Theatre for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alan Islas -- Alan Islas (talk) 13:20, 22 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Belgrade Theatre

The article Belgrade Theatre you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Belgrade Theatre for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of the article. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Alan Islas -- Alan Islas (talk) 23:01, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive - July 2021

Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive
July 2021 Backlog Drive: This Thursday, July 1, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number, length, and age, of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)

GAN Backlog Drive – January 2022

Good article nominations | January 2022 Backlog Drive
January 2022 Backlog Drive: On New Year's Day, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? You can sign up here.
Other ways to participate: Join the conversations on our talkpage.
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive. Click here and remove your username from the mailing list to opt out of any future messages. --Usernameunique

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles at 21:17, 31 December 2021 (UTC).

June 2022 Good Article Nominations backlog drive

Good article nominations | June 2022 Backlog Drive

On 1 June, a one-month backlog drive for good article nominations will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number and age of articles reviewed. Interested in taking part? Sign up here!

You're receiving this message because you have conducted 5+ good article reviews or participated in previous backlog drives. Click here to opt out of any future messages. (t · c) buidhe 04:26, 28 May 2022 (UTC)