User talk:Canadian Paul/2012 to Articles For Creation

Boswell Williams

Any chance you can help with a approx. YOB for him? I used worldstatesmen.org but User:Mewulwe has decided to revert it repeatedly again, using the "this site copies from Wikipedia" argument. – Connormah (talk) 21:42, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

Started a WP:RS/N thread on the site. – Connormah (talk) 21:37, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Did a check but didn't find anything that would satisfy this user. I'll wait to see what other response there is on the RS/N before commenting, otherwise it's just going to turn into another go-nowhere discussion since we just have different viewpoints on the issue and need a third-party to really move things forward. Canadian Paul 22:28, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

Not getting any comment unfortunately and Mewulwe has removed it again. – Connormah (talk) 23:49, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Any chance at finding a DOB for Napoleon Ashley-Larsen? – Connormah (talk) 01:34, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

I took a look, but there really isn't much at all on him. Sorry. Canadian Paul 14:58, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

Sigh. Mewulwe is at again at Ansumane Mané...I provided 2 sources supporting a 1940 YOB only to be reverted repeadtly under the "this copies Wikipedia claim", which is baseless again. Can you look over your sources and/or give me some help here? CMAH (Connormah's Sock) 23:21, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

It looks like it's already been taken care of, but I'll keep my eye on it. Canadian Paul 13:49, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Elevating into another possible edit war again. Could you comment on the WP:RSN thread I started? – Connormah (talk) 06:37, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Also, found that Hugh E. Wild is alive. – Connormah (talk) 22:18, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

I see that Mewulwe has been blocked for a while - hopefully this will encourage them to let a discussion finish before continuously edit warring. I've reverted the removal of a reliable source per the other user's comments and will continue to monitor the page to make sure that neither party goes over the 3RR rule (again). Canadian Paul 23:12, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

D.W._Barron

Guess this goes here. re: http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=D.W._Barron&action=history

I'm not fussed - I didn't do the original death adding, but it seemed sensible for me to confirm it. You may have noticed I created the original article.

I have had too many fruitless discussions with one Wikipedia editor (mainly) who was being particularly ignorant, for me to care either way.

I no longer bother contributing.

I wasn't even going to bother to add his death myself - I don't like the hassle.

It's a shame because I could or would have added quite a lot of pages about pre-web but important Computer Scientists, such as Barron, but am not prepared to put the work in when someone who knows nothing about them will come along and delete them. It is very hard to meet the current online reference standards for people who retired before 1990. Yet there are loads of pages about nonentities that were created a while go that continue.

Sorry, you got the message about the way I feel, but there you go.

Good luck with your work, hope you are better than the other editors I have had the misfortune to encounter.

Hugh.glaser (talk) 11:50, 7 January 2012 (UTC)

Tommy Dermody

Excellent work finding this little nugget of information! I hope to complete all the missing Olympic fencing biographies before London 2012, and then move onto another low-key Olympic event. Lugnuts (talk) 08:39, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Can't take any credit, I just had the article forwarded to me by one of my peers! As for another low-key Olympic event, equestrians, wrestlers, and weightlifters all have medal winners - let alone regular participants - who don't have biographies. Keep up the good work, and not just Olympians - you pop up on some of the other pages that I have an eye on too! Canadian Paul 23:16, 24 January 2012 (UTC)

Broken Sword II: The Smoking Mirror GA1

Hello, Paul! I was wondering if You could review Broken Sword II: The Smoking Mirror for GA? Best --Khanassassin (talk) 20:52, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I generally don't do GA reviews anymore... I only did Mega Man 3 because I nominated one of my articles and I believe in not adding to the backlog at WP:GAN. Sorry. Canadian Paul 15:15, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Oh, OK :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Khanassassin (talk • contribs) 14:45, 3 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Hubert Brooks

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:06, 5 February 2012 (UTC)

John Harlan (announcer)

Any chance you can dig up any approximate YOB for John Harlan (announcer)? Thanks. – Connormah (talk) 01:38, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

I looked, but I couldn't find anything, sorry. A very common name and a somewhat obscure individual are never a good combination. Canadian Paul 18:36, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Canadian Paul (from a fellow Canuck),

My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.

So a few things about the interviews:

• Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
• Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
• All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
• All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
• The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.

Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 21:17, 8 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for John Russell (equestrian)

The DYK project (nominate) 09:22, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Elwyn Friedrich

Haha, thanks for this! I did look on SportsRef (I searched by surname), but didn't pick him up for whatever reason. Fixed the deaths page - will look to create the bio in the near future. Lugnuts (talk) 18:49, 15 February 2012 (UTC)

Talk Back - Admin Interviews

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

GA nomination for Hubert Brooks

Greetings, Canadian Paul! I'm just letting you know that I'll be reviewing you GA nomination of Hubert Brooks. Here is a link to the discussion. I wish this article best of luck! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 11:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The article is passed. Congratulations! :) Wilhelmina Will (talk) 11:07, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! Cheers! Canadian Paul 16:28, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur Jackson (sport shooter)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 24 February 2012 (UTC)

RE:Francis Gleeson (priest)

Hello Canadian Paul. Thanks for the message on my talk page. It's great to be able to come back to a new GA at the weekend! I just wanted to say thankyou for reviewing the article (I always appreciate the hard and often unsung work that reviewers do) and I hoped you enjoyed reading it - Dumelow (talk) 07:41, 25 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur Keily

The DYK project (nominate) 09:17, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Carlos P. Scovil

Thank you for your message. Here is the answer:

1. First: The abbreviations say in which district the member was elected, as opposed [although at this time mostly coterminous) to the actual county (Assembly); and as repeated in full length in the succession box (Senate). To spell it all out is not helpful at this place, it clutters up the sentence. So, please do not change this.
2. Second: Inline citations are required only for C-class articles upwards. Start class does not require them. To cite three different sources six times in a sentence (yes, I've seen things like that) is not helpful, clutters up the text, and makes it very difficult to edit later. Besides, the info is a digest of all the sources, most of it being repeated, and some items being erroneous in the sources. If you want to verify any info, just look through all the sources, or be intelligent enough that the Civil List probably contains info on his political carrer, the newspaper clippings of his personal life...
3. Thirdly: I don't mind somebody rewriting the opening paragraph. It just got reverted with everything else. The place of birth and death are vital information (pun intended :D)which should go into the brackets, which is the mandated form in German and French (and possibly more...) Wikipedias. (I'm not sure why the English wikipedians insist in such a disrupting form, stating the places elsewhere. Years ago I left a message at the guideline's talk page to reconsider this, but I suppose nothing came of it.) Just to change it, without adding any info, is IMO forbidden by the guideline which says not to change things from one accepted format to the other (like "October 5" and "5 October"), sorry for not remembering the link to this one. Anyway, it's not something that would make me revert a change, per the preceding.
4. Finally: There you are, this is what I meant by mess-up... Kraxler (talk) 16:49, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Ok for your proposed changes. By the way, the district abbreviations are not "normal text", just an appendix. If something doesn't seem right to me, I'll fix it later. You are quite right that unusual or controversial content should always be referenced, in this special case, I thought that the source saying "ONE HUNDRED YEARS" was obvious enough to show where the info came from, something of a shortcut maybe, but entirely my fault. Anyway, there is no doubt about his celebrating his 100th bithday, as the birthday is a question of public record for judges in New York since they introduced the constitutional age limit. I was quite surprised myself to find a centenarian among the New York state senators (which is part of my current project, New York State Legislatures), there seem to be not so many around. He might also be the oldest former member of both Houses of the NY legislature ever, but to check that, I'll have to do another two years of research... Kraxler (talk) 17:26, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

By the way, should Scovil rather be listed at List of centenarians (politicians and government servants) instead of at "centenarian jurists", or at both lists? he was five years in the Legislature and 10 years a judge... Kraxler (talk) 18:42, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Let's leave it as it is, then. In a general way, I'd say listing once is good enough. Kraxler (talk) 21:25, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

USAF Generals

Here are some who are close to or over 90 that I've recently created: H. M. Darmstandler, Morton J. Gold, James D. Hughes, Ray B. Sitton. – Connormah (talk) 05:03, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I missed this earlier, sorry. I added Gold to the list and Darmstandler and Hughes to my (offline) upcoming list. Remind me about Sitton near the end of the year! Thanks! Canadian Paul 20:39, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Unrelated, possibly another centenarian here: John Wingblade – Connormah (talk) 03:20, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Also created these last week : Neil D. Van Sickle and Michael J. Ingelido. – Connormah (talk) 03:22, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Added Wingblade to the proper centenarian list and Van Sickle and Ingelido to my own. Thanks! Canadian Paul 15:57, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

Another for the nonagenarians list: Just found out that Frank Pierpoint Appleby is alive (as of last year). – Connormah (talk) 23:09, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Actually, he received the award in 2005... I'm going to double check to make sure he hasn't died since! Canadian Paul 01:54, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Missed that. I have a 2011 article (I think) in an edit summary changing the birth date template to birth date and age. – Connormah (talk) 04:12, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I noticed that after I posted the comment. Oops. I've added him to the list - good spot! Canadian Paul 03:20, 20 March 2012 (UTC)

wikisamg

As I understand, this User Talk is created to resolve some problem connected with creating/redacting of articles. Excuse me, if I am wrong. So, recently I have created an arcticle "GTB DLP". Some later, his article was deleted, however I have unswered on "Speedy delletion" with followig comment: "This article just describe GTB DLP solution. In future it will be completed". Why the article was deleted? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wikisamg (talk • contribs) 10:34, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

List of Olympic medalists in art competitions

Wow, I had no idea the Olympics used to include competitions in architecture, literature, etc. I saw you nominate it at FLC, but you didn't bring it to DYK. How come? I'm not of the habit of nominating other people's work, but I will nominate this one for DYK if you don't. Good job with the page. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:19, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

It's a slow day at the office, must be reacting to the watchlist too quickly. Guess I always expect to see a DYK nom come before a featured nom, though there's no particular reason to do it one way or the other. – Muboshgu (talk) 19:23, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for List of Olympic medalists in art competitions

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Speedy deletion declined: Zvi Raphaeli

Hello Canadian Paul. I am just letting you know that I declined the speedy deletion of Zvi Raphaeli, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, because of the following concern: Article has been edited since it was tagged and is no longer a copyvio. Thank you. — Malik Shabazz ^Talk/_Stalk 20:47, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Josephine Joseph

I did not know the rules about the death section. I'm pretty new here. I also was not stating she was dead, I was simply trying to convey that it is unknown if she is alive or dead. How would you suggest I convey that she may be alive, or not, on a page? Joe2589 (talk) 04:15, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Canadian Paul. You have new messages at Template:Did_you_know_nominations/Väinö_Koskela.
Message added 20:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

- Jarry1250 ^{[Deliberation needed]} 20:59, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello

Hi Canadian Paul! I need an admin favor from you, I hope I can't get it? I nominated List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2011 (U.S.) for featured list, however, during the process the discussion here was opened. You can see that it was inactive for more two weeks and I can't see any concencus. Could you please close it as you did with the previous? Thank You. — Tomica (talk) 19:16, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

I'm not sure that I've ever closed a merge discussion before but, nonetheless, it's clear that there is no consensus here, so I've gone ahead and done it. Canadian Paul 14:24, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks. — Tomica (talk) 15:58, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Väinö Koskela

Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:03, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Cambodia at the 2012 Summer Olympics

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!

Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know:

• Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
  • Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
  • If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 20:35, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

A cookie for you!

For your level-headed contributions on Talk:Deaths in 2012, specifically in the Non-notable entries section. I appreciated your input. Thanks!   — Jess· Δ♥ 03:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

I always appreciate baked goods. I've written more in three posts than I have on most articles that I've created, so I'm going to try and stay away from the discussion for a while and let others have their say. Canadian Paul 19:27, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

re: Florence Lee

Hi Paul. I think you're right about the year. IBDB also has her YOB as 1888. I think those two sources are enough, unless there's a record in the press from 1962 saying she died aged 104. Lugnuts (talk) 17:33, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. On a semi-related note, a query was posted on my talkpage about Louise Latimer. Are you able to find anything to suggest she's still alive? Thanks again! Lugnuts (talk) 19:35, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Gosh, I keep missing all my talk page messages... I'll take a look into it. Canadian Paul 15:24, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

No luck unfortunately. I did turn up a Google News result about her marriage, but the summary says "Louise Latimer Reveals Marriage Hollywood, Sept. 2.--(AP.)--Loutsr I Lntlmer. film player, Erwln Oelscy, scenarist, couldn't keep their secret nny when they" and I can neither access the article nor make sense of who it is referring to. If we knew that, we could do some more sleuthing. Canadian Paul 15:41, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Paul. FYI - According to Find A Grave, she died a few days ago. Lugnuts (talk) 18:49, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Well now at least I don't feel so bad for not being able to figure out her DOD last month! Thanks! Canadian Paul 14:15, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Mungo Jerry

I came across your page almost accidentally, so please forgive me if you are not the correct receipient. There seems to be an ongoing problem on the Mungo Jerry article with various IPs (possibly the same person) vandalising the page by subsituting the name Roland Kok. I have no idea why. As an administrator, could you please have a look to see whether a short term block on editing privileges may be appropriate to stop this habit. Thank you,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi. I took a look at the article history, and I don't believe that there's quite frequent enough vandalism to warrant page protection just yet. I will keep an eye on the page and, if it flares up again I'll take appropriate action. I've also warned the latest IP to vandalize In the Summertime (Mungo Jerry song), although I doubt that it will do much good since it seems to be an IP-hopper. Canadian Paul 20:28, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Hello. Thanks for your reply and I fully appreciate your stance. Thank you,

Derek R Bullamore (talk) 20:42, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

I've protected the song for a week in the hopes that the vandal will go away. I'm still holding out hope that I won't have to do the same with the band article, but I suspect that will come shortly... Canadian Paul 18:56, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

OK, thanks. It beats me what people get out of this - kicks ??! Seems a very weak way of 'improving' their lot. - Derek R Bullamore (talk) 19:02, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

It must be hilarious to someone. I've protected Summertime for another two weeks. Canadian Paul 04:25, 10 May 2012 (UTC)

Mail

Hello, Canadian Paul. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

Re: Pauls Jean Welden article

To begin with, I must apologize for the rudeness of my edit summary. On closer inspection (coupled with your elucidating response on my usertalk page), it would definitely appear that my concern that a conspiracy theory was being espoused was inaccurate. "Possibly living people" seems to be a category specifically designed for contributors to speculate - without the need for reliable references - a theory that someone is alive, who is by all accounts likely not. I find the category to be a bad one for precisely that reason, and it could easily be used as a tool for POV pushers, speculating that Elvis, Jim Morrison, etc. to advocate that the subject might be alive. I went too far, assuming that you were one of these sorts of people. Clearly, I was mistaken, so i apologize for the method by which I voiced my disagreement, but not the disagreement with the category itself. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 05:14, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I would argue that the Missing People category only quantifies what we know - that the person is in fact missing. It doesn't make the intuitive - and imo speculative - leap that the person is either alive or dead. I have no opinion as to the merits of its inclusion in a BLP article, apart from the simple classification of an article within WP. I have no knowledge of previous discussions on the matter, though I have no doubt that there probably was - we argue about everything else here. ;) I agree that this might be something to bring to a larger forum, and think that you make a valid point. If you choose to do so, let me know where you post, so I can follow the discussion. - Jack Sebastian (talk) 18:21, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Kray twins

I don't have any brilliant ideas, but I have wondered if maybe we should have a hidden maintenance category for "Categorization by death year not appropriate", or something along those lines, for articles such as this one where the topic is multiple people who died in different years (or potentially other cases where such categorization is inappropriate, though I can't think of any examples offhand.) Bearcat (talk) 21:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

It occurred to me just now that another example of where such a category might be useful would be a historical figure whose actual death year is disputed (if we have any of those.) Bearcat (talk) 21:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

triple crown

Congratulations to Canadian Paul on being awarded the standard triple crown, for a trio of audited work on wikipedia. Keep up the good work! Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:30, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks! Canadian Paul 22:50, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

David Jacubanis

Any chance you can like this to David Stanley Jacubanis? – Connormah (talk) 03:09, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Bill Hudson (ice hockey) may be [1] also. – Connormah (talk) 03:52, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Found a lot of the Canadian MP's death dates on your possible centenarians list...see my contribs for all. – Connormah (talk) 04:51, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm sure that the Find a Grave profile is our Jacubanis... in official records, he's listed as "Jacobanis", so there's no doubt in my mind. I was a little skeptical about Hudson at first, but here's a report linking the professional ice hockey player (who comes up with far more accurate results as "Billy Hudson") with the individual in the genealogical profile (by his participation in the 1924 Jimmies).

As for the Canadian politicians, fantastic work! I have a secondary list (to replenish the "Potential candidates" list - no need in listing over 50 at any time) that I've been going through and I've found death dates for another half-dozen of them or so. I was going to add a bunch more to the list, but I'll list them on my talk page first in case you want a crack at them: James Augustine Power, Antoine Fréchette, Richard Plant Bower, J.-Armand Ménard, Charles Cannon (Quebec politician), Thomas Andrew Murray Kirk, Alfred Belzile, Wesley Irwin Haskett, Paul-Edmond Gagnon. Great stuff again, I don't even know what to say! Canadian Paul 13:22, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

I'll look at them tonight. You can send the whole list to cmahh[at]shaw.ca if you want as well. – Connormah (talk) 22:49, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Wow, these ones are toughies! Got Charles Cannon (Quebec politician), though. Send me the whole list and I'll see what I can do. – Connormah (talk) 04:53, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

I see that you also got Wesley Irwin Haskett as well! At least I don't feel so bad for not being able to find death information on them... Those are all the Canadian politicians I have for now... I'm going to have to comb through Category:Possibly living people to find any more. Everyone else on my offline list is from a different country, often a non-English speaking one, which I am currently sorting through. Canadian Paul 14:48, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Belzile and Bower down. Not 100% sure on the Bower source, feel free to rv if you think I'm making too much of an assumption. – Connormah (talk) 03:50, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Sent some emails to some cities regarding some of the other names. Will let you know if I get positive replies. – Connormah (talk) 04:54, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Bower seems fine to me. I'll go ahead and add the rest to the "Potential candidates" list for now... they can always be removed if new information surfaces. Canadian Paul 14:12, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Any chance you have a list of the ones that you've added "date of death unknown" to? I can look for those too. – Connormah (talk) 02:56, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

I don't have a list, but several names come to mind if you're interested: Charles Richard, Armand Cloutier, Joseph O'Keefe, Gustave Roy, John Hunter (Canadian politician), and Jean-Paul St. Laurent. Canadian Paul 17:26, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

Also, if you could find a DOB for Mack B. Stokes, that would be great - he's over 90 for sure, but I can't pin down even a year of birth... Canadian Paul 14:18, 12 June 2012 (UTC)

Got it, looks like he's 100... – Connormah (talk) 18:45, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Nicely done! Too bad there's not a citation that explicitly states that he's 100 so we could add him to the appropriate centenarian list... did you ever look into the Canadian politicians above him? Canadian Paul 20:57, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm working on them, though I haven't made any progress as of late - I'm pretty sure every one that you've listed is deceased - too bad Canada doesn't have something like the SSDI - it would make things so much easier! – Connormah (talk) 21:32, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Can you look into Bob Barnwell? He may still be around, though you never know.. – Connormah (talk) 02:10, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Oops, I missed this... I'll take a look later today. Canadian Paul 15:51, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I might have gotten it. From this and this I gathered that he was probably born no later than 1918 and no earlier than 1910 and that he lived in South Carolina in the 1930s. From that I then found this, which gives his middle name is Elliot (not sure where the "W") came from. From that, it's an easy trek to the SSDI: June 24, 1915 – October 9, 2001. The only problem is that there's no connection to Illinois and, of course, the middle name, so perhaps this is a completely different person... I'm not sure. He did play football, however, which is what makes me suspicious... the pictures look similar too... Canadian Paul 20:34, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

I got it. Died in 1985, born 1916. Could've been still alive. One of the more tougher ones. Looked through Western Illinois documents and saw he was from Missouri State Univ., then went off from there. – Connormah (talk) 23:06, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Oops, looks like I got that one totally wrong... good thing I didn't update the page... Canadian Paul 14:06, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

Belize and the Olympics GA Review

A gift!

I figured I'd show thanks for taking on this review with a few In-N-Out burgers. :) In any case, I think I've resolved the comment you raised on the review page. Let me know what you think. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 05:11, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for also taking on the Antigua and Barbuda review. Also, I'm glad to find another who has tasted, and has seen. :)

In any case, it looks like User:Oakley77 actually beat me to the punch on all but one comment, but he addressed most of them quite well. I think it is ready for a second look. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 03:46, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:1920 Muncie Flyers season/GA1

Hi Canadian Paul, I briefly reviewed this review at Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/GAN backlog elimination drives/June-July 2012/Totals and ticked it off. I'm quite happy with your decision not to pass the nomination as it stands (I read the article), but having looked at the review it was not all that easy to see why it failed (other than prose). I (obviously) did not nominate the article but if I had, I would have liked to know why and what to do about it (should I renominate - hypothetically). Can I suggest that you try to make the summary a bit more user friendly? It can't be too difficult to put (major aspects): "not much mention of the players themselves" (if that was the reason for the fail). I have no interest in the article, but I still find it hard to know from your review why it was failed on prose and completeness; what additional information was needed; and why it was failed instead of put "On Hold"?

P.S. I won't take it to WP:GAR, but I could deduct one point if I was so inclined. Pyrotec (talk) 19:59, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

• See Talk:Touro University California/GA1, not one of mine, it appears to be a similar approach to yours, but its far more user-friendly. Pyrotec (talk) 20:12, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I have to disagree with your assessment here. My review states clearly in numbered points the things that need to be fixed for the article to be improved. There are ten detailed bullets explaining what can be improved as well as a brief summary explaining why I failed rather than put on hold. I've never had anyone complain about my style of reviews before (except for one time that I misapplied the stability quick-fail criterion, and I rectified that quickly by doing a proper review) and have always been available to the editors - whether I fail the article on put it on hold - to address any concerns they may have with my reviews. I'm not perfect, but this is the first complaint I've had about a full review.

Having said that, I have been doing this for quite a long time and I understand that standards and expectations change, especially over Wikipedia. I would have been much happier to just accept some constructive criticism and move on if it had not been for the threat that was tacked on to the end of the comments. It is unfortunate that, in a post about making criticism more accessible and user friendly, I was reminded that you could have taken it to WP:GAR (which would be a little counterproductive, considering that you agreed with my final assessment, just not my method of explaining it) and deduct points. To be honest, I put aside a lot of other things I wanted to do on Wikipedia to participate in this review drive because I felt that it would be a good way to really improve the project. And I hate having to fail an article rather than put it on hold, even more so when the person has been waiting 3 months just to get their article reviewed. It was a difficult and agonizing decision but, unfortunately, it was the correct one. I spent a lot of time on this one figuring out if I could just improve it through a copyedit of my own (as you can see from the article history, I started one, and continued until the issues became too numerous) and in the end I figured that my time was better spent leaving instructions on how to improve the article rather than doing it myself. Honestly, I can understand the threat of losing points if I had done a five-minute review, but when someone makes a good-faith effort to outline the problems of the article based on the criteria, then that threat should never even be in the cards. Canadian Paul 21:56, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

I sorry that you "read" it that way, but it is not a complaint about your reviewing, nor was it a "threat" to take the article to WP:GAR (I have no interest in the article and I thought that I had made that clear), nor to remove a point, that was never on the cards - that is "public naming and shaming" and is, in your case since your reviewing is good, likely to be counter-productive. I spent a lot of time reading your review and it was obvious to me that it was not a "quick fail" and that both effort and care had gone into the review. Having then read the article, I also shared your view that the prose needed improvement (the article is quite difficult to read). However, it was not too clear about broadness, so I summarised each of your bullet points. Prose: points 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 & 8. References: 4. Broadness: 9, 10. It is simply one of presentation. It would be very easy to add that summary (of mine) to the {{GAList2}} under the clauses where there is a cross and/or a question mark; and it would improve the presentation: but I'm not trying to make you do it that way. Could we start again, and move onto constructive criticism? I looked at quite a few of these reviews, Tea with toast's review, above, is the closest to yours. I like it and it reflects the care and effort, such as you expended on your review, back to anyone that reads the review; and it does not impose any extra effort. Pyrotec (talk) 08:40, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I really just don't get what you're looking for, but I've been a little thick these days, so that's probably more my fault than anything. The differences between the review you pointed out and my own are minor (in my opinion) and I am not going to conform my style to fit anyone's personal preferences. If I'm going to review Good Articles, I am going to do it in the way that I am most comfortable with doing it because I am volunteering time here that I arguably don't have. If that is no longer sufficient for GA reviewing purposes, then I will stop reviewing GAs. I style my reviews in a way that works for me. If the nominator is unclear on something, they are always welcome to come to me for clarification and I am always available to provide more direction. Please let me know if this is not acceptable, as I will stop reviewing GAs and will move on to other areas of the project. Canadian Paul 14:25, 19 June 2012 (UTC)

Saint Vincent and the Grenadines Olympics GAN

All set and ready to go! If any other concerns come up, let me know. Thank you for taking the time to review this GAN and the previous ones I have nominated. --Starstriker7^(Talk) 16:59, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Will take another look at it now. Canadian Paul 18:49, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Boden Professor

Thanks for the kind words and the helpful post-GA suggestions, which I've endeavoured to take on board directly or indirectly. And thanks for the GA badge, too! Regards, Bencherlite^Talk 23:19, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I hope that some my ramblings will end up being of some value to the article! Canadian Paul 14:53, 21 June 2012 (UTC)

Alapalooza

Hello, Canadian Paul. You have new messages at Talk:Alapalooza/GA1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Alapalooza is now officially a Good Article. Congratulations! Thank you for being cooperative, responsive, and thorough during the review process. --ThaddeusB (talk) 18:25, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Cheers and thanks for being so thorough yourself! I'm happy to be held to a high standard because the article is always improved in those situations, which was clearly the case here! Canadian Paul 20:36, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

Luigi Cavalieri

Hi. You recently re-added a "date of death unknown" to the article, citing this page. I translated it with Google, but I don't get how this is relevant to Cavalieri or his death. Could you clarify? InedibleHulk (talk) 16:00, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, the Google translate for that article is really poor for some reason, I had to get a native speaker to verify the information itself. What it says is that, at the time, Attilio Pavesi and Clara Marangoni were Italy's oldest living Olympic competitors. Since I work with Bill Mallon's Olympic research group and specialize in the world's oldest Olympians, I know that sometimes these reports jump the "oldest competitor" gun without much research but we did follow-up and were able to verify the report's accuracy, not to mention that I haven't seen any contradictory evidence in the four years since it was published (there's a dispute as to Gabre Gabric-Calvesi's year of birth, with some sources indicating she was born in 1914 and others in 1917). Anyhow, questioning accuracy of a reliable source would be original research anyways, but I figured since you brought the issue up, it couldn't hurt for me to give a little extra detail. I do appreciate you being cautious with the possibly living people category as well; I've seen a lot of edits moving individuals into "year of death missing" based on the fact that no notable individual, ever, could possibly have lived to the age of 90 without a big news report proving it. Of course, I also have to do a lot of maintenance in the other direction, since the category has been used a dumping ground for people too lazy to spend even 30 seconds checking Google (or even reading the references) to check if a person is alive or dead. But that's a rant for another day, haha. Canadian Paul 17:58, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Keep in mind, this article is from 2008. At the time, Cavalieri was 94. A report saying two older Olympians are the oldest doesn't necessarily mean a slightly younger one is dead. The way I see it, it's better to err on the side of living (a dead man can't read his own entry) than dead (a living, senile man can and may be led to believe he is a ghost). InedibleHulk (talk) 22:17, 24 June 2012 (UTC)

Marangoni is younger than Cavalieri, that is my point. Canadian Paul 03:33, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

You're right. I'd misread Pavesi and Marangoni were both 97 in '08. But the Marangoni Wiki article clears that up. Seems safe(r) to assume Cavalieri's dead now. InedibleHulk (talk) 07:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Cheers then! Thanks for leaving me a note on my talk page rather than reverting/edit warring etc by the way.... one doesn't see that all that often these days and, whether I'm wrong or right, I always appreciate it! Canadian Paul 13:52, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

I'd rather find out I'm wrong than presume I'm right. Especially when dealing with a subject I hadn't heard of before I clicked "Random article". Thanks for leaving something useful in your edit summary. That's another dying Wikihabit. InedibleHulk (talk) 02:31, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Alapalooza

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:02, 27 June 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Tropical Storm Harvey (1999)/GA1

Hello Canadian Paul, I have fixed most of the comments on the GAN on Tropical Storm Harvey (1999). Anyway, I don't mean to sound rude, but I would like to have a response ASAP, if possible. I am currently losing the WikiCup and the round will be over in less than 24 hours. Anyway, thank you for the review! Regards,--12george1 (talk) 02:21, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

re: Arthur Smith (fencer)

Hi Paul. Yes, that's fine to put him back in the living cat. Was just going off SR and couldn't see where the year change had come from! Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 10:18, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

Re: Ellie Cole

Hi Paul, alright, I'll hold off for now; sorry about the inconvenience. To me "thus" is way too formal there – this isn't a mathematics textbook! How about "therefore" or "consequently"? It could be an English dialect thing. Graham87 14:33, 29 June 2012 (UTC)

I agree with Graham about "so" ... it's not informal, and "thus" reads clunkily to many readers. But I came here to compliment you on your fine copy-editing at that article. Tony (talk) 02:03, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Indeed, I think you're doing a great job, despite our little disagreement. The other GA review on the page is a mock one; I'm just a regular participant in the History of the Paralympic Movement in Australia project, and I often do copyediting there. Graham87 03:28, 1 July 2012 (UTC)

Rule 3 on your living olympians

I don't want to edit your pages, but I believe that rule 3 should be deleted, since Signe Johansson-Engdahl, who was born May 27, 1905, died in 2010.Tom Barrister 03:16, 2 July 2012 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Tombarrister (talk • contribs)

That is true, but even though she has died, her date of birth still sets the upper boundary for how early an Olympian could be born and still living. The oldest living Olympian is almost certainly Walter Walsh but, until that is proven, his DOB can't be set as the upper limit as there is a (very slim) chance that someone is older. Canadian Paul 04:33, 15 July 2012 (UTC)

Luigi Antinori

Sorry for the late reply to your message. Yes indeed, it is from a public domain source. I was helping with transcribing the text of the first volume of the second edition of Groves at Distributed Proofreaders and copied information from a few of the "A" articles into some wikipedia articles. It seems that the second edition was published from 1904 to 1910, which is safe to use under applicable US copyright laws. Ruzulo (talk) 06:27, 2 July 2012 (UTC)

Frank Gorman‎

Can you include references for the birth and death dates? I was unable to find those dates, and they're not in the references provided. Pburka (talk) 03:11, 4 July 2012 (UTC)

Nguyen Huu Co

The only link you provided for Co's death is in Vietnamese. I found no mention of the death in any search of the net in English. You also did not update the Co article or add Co to the July 2012 necrology. Quis separabit? 14:55, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

I did update the Co article, I'm not sure what you mean. As for the other points, a citation in Vietnamese is sufficient and I'm not required to add him to the July 2012 necrology; that page takes an incredibly long time to load on my slow computer/internet and I'd prefer not to edit it. Canadian Paul 15:01, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Battle of Byczyna/GA1

Thanks, I am back and replied at the talk page. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:45, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, I'll take a look at it shortly. Canadian Paul 16:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Talk:Ununseptium/GA1

Fixed all your points (except for one, reason noted on review page), so you can take another look. Thanks. Double sharp (talk) 15:55, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

Great, I'll take a look at it shortly. Canadian Paul 16:51, 7 July 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Just to let you know I appreciate the expedient and thorough review of Ellie Cole. JJ Harrison (talk) 22:35, 8 July 2012 (UTC)

Cheers, thanks so much! Canadian Paul 03:34, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Ditto for the prompt and trouble-free review of St Ceinwen's Church. I can't afford barnstars, though... Thanks. Bencherlite^Talk 13:58, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

I'm not certain that "told nominator to fix two mistakes they didn't make" qualifies as "trouble free", but no problem either way, haha. Canadian Paul 14:00, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Better than having to fix two mistakes added by a GA-reviewer, anyway... (not something you've done to my articles, I hasten to add!) Bencherlite^Talk 14:18, 10 July 2012 (UTC)

Apple review

Thanks for taking the time to review Apple Inc. litigation! I'm tied up today but will go though your concerns tomorrow, and hopefully soon we'll have another good article. Sctechlaw (talk) 21:26, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds great! Canadian Paul 23:46, 12 July 2012 (UTC)

I am sorry I haven't finished this, I have been unexpectedly tied up for a week. If you could leave it on hold til Sunday night, I'd sure appreciate it. I plan on addressing the issue resolution this weekend. Thanks so much for your patience. — Sctechlaw (talk) 23:06, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem, it can wait that long. Canadian Paul 13:43, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for your patience Paul. I finally was able to get to the article Sunday, and it took me all evening to fix all the redirects in the refs, thanks to the ever-shifting sands of the net. There are 4 issues still listed in toolserver's check on the article's external links, but they all seem okay to me as they do return the selected docs. They occur because the trademark office uses weird server links, and the one on Apple's filings takes a while to load, but the documents are returned properly so I'm not sure what else I can do with those. The one on Torvik's blog seems okay to me so not sure what Toolserver wants on that one, and the Edgar server uses links as bad as the Trademark office. (Thank the government code monkeys for that, heh.) I was not aware of using Toolserver for checking links before your review, and it sure is a nifty tool, so I'm glad I've now learned of it.

The "leave extra lines" comments are to ensure editors leave an extra line between major sections as it helps the reader by visually separating major article sections in a way that just using headings does not. I find reading long articles like this one visually annoying unless there are some visual breaks to help keep all the text from tiring my eyes. Probably reading too much legal stuff over the course of time did it to me, lol, but I know there are many others out there who need that extra accessibility help, so there it is.

I addressed your concern on the Woolworth's trademark story (please check to see that it actually does), but still have to address the rest and will get to each of those in the morning after I get some sleep, since it's nearly 2am here. Hopefully I'll have no more major time interruptions while I tidy up this project tomorrow. Thanks so much for your patience! — Sctechlaw (talk) 09:04, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Sounds good. If you're finished by tomorrow, I should have time to look at it then. Canadian Paul 21:16, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

I've addressed all your concerns except the lead, which I will do next; hopefully I can finish it this evening. When I do, I'll leave you a note here. If you're feeling impatient, please consider having a look at how I addressed your itemized concerns, (save the lead, which is my last "to-do' item). Thanks, Sctechlaw (talk) 21:47, 23 July 2012 (UTC)

Finished the clean-up last night and added a user entry to the review page. — Sctechlaw (talk) 20:31, 24 July 2012 (UTC)

I've finished addressing the second set of concerns save for updating old access dates, so if you'd please have a look-see, I might be nearer to cocktail hour. :-) Thanks — Sctechlaw (talk) 00:15, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

____

Once again, thank you so much for your review efforts and thus for contributing to the birth of another good article. One question: how does the article now get listed as a good article in the Law good articles? (it is currently GA in the Social sciences and society good articles, of which Law articles are a subset.) Does this happen by osmotic trickle-down with server updates or must one follow-up on it to make that happen? — Sctechlaw (talk) 17:05, 26 July 2012 (UTC)

If you're talking about the list of Good Articles, I already listed it in that section with this edit (granted, it doesn't easily fit into any of those categories though). If you're talking about the banner on the talk page, I don't know if it gets a "title" such as "law" beyond "social sciences and society" but, if it does, it will do so automatically. 13:19, 27 July 2012 (UTC)

User:Canadian Paul/Olympics

Hi Paul. Hope you don't mind, but I've been bold and sorted the top-half of this list A-Z by country. This makes it quicker for me to find the rule for X nation when I'm starting a new article! Thanks. Lugnuts (talk) 12:26, 13 July 2012 (UTC)

No problem. I'd really been meaning to organize the criteria in some manner anyways, so thanks for making it easier on me! Canadian Paul 04:24, 15 July 2012 (UTC)