User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 19

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25

List of invasive species in the Everglades at FLC

Hi. I noticed that List of invasive species in the Everglades was placed on the "urgents" list at the top of the FLC page. If there is something I have not yet addressed from a reviewer, will you let me know please? Is it merely a matter of attracting more eyes on the list? I'll be happy to do anything I can. Thanks. --Moni3 (talk) 19:18, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

The "urgents" list is similar to User:Deckiller/FAC urgents; it's just a list of FACs needing more reviews. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 22:01, 2 March 2010 (UTC)

• Yupyup, I was planning on holding off for a while. I wasn't even planning on doing the Olympic list, but that just kind of overtook me. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:05, 5 March 2010 (UTC)

List of India women ODI cricketers

The ip was right in inserting the update tag. India and England just played five ODIs, so the stats for about 14 players has to be updated. I just started with the articles today as the games are done and am keeping the list for the end and the tag doesn't make a difference. Apparently our readers like instantaneous updates! cheers. —SpacemanSpiff 00:27, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Alright, thanks for the notice. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:29, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Baseless comments?

I had nominated this one for FAC, and one IP has come and left a bunch of comments in the FAC, which is absolutely wrong and baseless. I understand probably the IP wasnot aware of jargons or what is reliable for music articles, however this may deviate from the normal FAC of the article. What to do in such cases? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:42, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

The directors will notice and take into account the IP's newness to FAC. As long as you address / respond to the editor's comments satisfactorily, then there shouldn't be a problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:45, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Dabomb. Shall I place a comment in the FAC? --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:51, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

If you like. SandyGeorgia or Karanacs are the ones who keep track of this stuff. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:55, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

i had forgotten ALL about this!!

I was looking for something earlier and came across this: [1] on my talk page. I guess I overlooked your response and then moved on to something else. However, for the future, I wanted to point you toward the disambig page for the word lead. While, yes, it can be spelled "lede"...that only applies when the word is referring to the opening section or paragraph of a news article. The word "lead" is the only form of the word used when one is referring to the opening section or paragraph of an informative article (such as Wikipedia articles.) I am truly not trying to be a sanctimonious bitch here - I say that with all sincerity. It's just that proper grammar, style, and word usage are some of my fortes and I want to help make sure you continue to use your caustic wit in the most effective way possible. Feel free to point out any "glaring errors" I may make as well - I like my condescension to carry as much weight as I can muster.  ;) ocrasaroon| ^{blah blah blah}

What you said is true, but on Wikipedia many editors use lead and lede in the same way (I myself prefer "lead"). Anyway, not worth picking a fight about. Have a nice day! Dabomb87 (talk) 13:20, 9 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh, I honestly was not trying to pick a fight! I haven't found a reason yet to take things personally and bicker with a complete stranger. Thanks for being kind - happy editing!

This user's page has been touched by a WikiFairy.

3rd Battalion 3rd Marines

Made major cuts per WP:Recentism on 3rd Battalion 3rd Marines. The history section is currently 3,988 words. 2,160 of them deal with 1942-1969 and 1,820 of them deal with 1969-2009. Palm_Dogg (talk) 17:59, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

FLCs needing revisits

Sorry I couldn't revisit some of the ones you closed, I don't know whether to continue reviewing old nominations or new ones to avoid these type of problems. I will do my best to revisit the ones I just reviewed.--Truco ₅₀₃ 03:59, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Alright I'll leave those types of notes so it will make your job easier. By the way, if its not a hassle. I guess I am in a prediciment with another user in Prince George's County Public Schools. This is my revision according to the Wikiproject school guidelines and general MOS guidelines (ie. history before the awards section, and fixes to section headers such as capitalization and turning characters to actual words; I think that the reader would benefit from knowing the history of the district and the list of schools before the awards that each school got because it would be more undestood as to why the awards were being received. The other user thinks otherwise with all this in the current revision. I would just like your input about the matter. WP:WPSCH/AG#Sections of the article, WP:WPSCH/AG##School district and List of schools articles, Dallas Independent School District is where I am coming from.--Truco ₅₀₃ 16:49, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Took a look. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:09, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Storm

Hey, I'm in the midst of a really scary storm, on dialup and generator power, and can't promote. My notes say I was looking at Avery School, Thomas of ... , Marwari horse, and Fox and Hound. If you're around and can look at those, I could move them to the featured log, if you could do the other steps. Arrrrgh, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:27, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Where are all those hurricane editors!? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:36, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

When it comes to fighting the storm, they're just as powerless as you :) Dabomb87 (talk) 23:37, 13 March 2010 (UTC)

Those four are good to go from my end. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:04, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

thanks so much ... i'll move them to featured log now, but could you sort them in to WP:FA (education, biology, literature and religion), but don't add them to WP:GO until after Gimmebot goes through there and archives Sat night? I'm going to shut down then so a power surge doesn't kill my hard drive ... thank you again !!!! Don't think I've ever been in 60-70 mph gusts before ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:12, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. Take care. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:20, 14 March 2010 (UTC)

Brady Bunch episodes

Support added. Jimknut (talk) 23:43, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quick response. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:26, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Re: Venues

I will try to get to that soon. Would you be willing to do me a favour by adding alt text to this page: Lisa Simpson. I really am no good at it. I took a stab at the lead image, so you could use that: "A yellow skinned cartoon character wearing a red dress. She is smiling." Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:46, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem, and will work on Lisa ASAP. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:47, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

see barnstar page 01:01, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Vietnam Medal of Honor recipients list

I just finished the last of his comments. Please let me know if you need me to do anything else. --Kumioko (talk) 02:00, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Linking question

I noticed that you unlinked South & Central America and the Caribbean in the Aiphanes article. I was wondering if your rationale for doing so - this isn't meant as a complaint, just to try to avoid the problem in the future. Guettarda (talk) 05:10, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Most, if not all, readers know where South America and Central America are, and perhaps to a lesser extent the Carribean. Nothing in those articles is likely to aid their understanding of the topic; indeed, WP:OVERLINK says not to link common geographical terms (such as continents). I guess you could make a case for linking Carribean but I don't think it's that useful. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:08, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for the clarification...missed that bit about not linking continents. Been guilty of that for what, 5.5 years now :( Guettarda (talk) 04:43, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

2009 World Series

Thanks for fixing those bits! Faults like that are easy to miss in an article of that size, quite helpful. Please stop by the full-on FAC if you get a chance! Staxringold _talk^contribs 20:11, 16 March 2010 (UTC)

Link

Regarding this edit [2] I prefer to leave that link in the article because the article Conditionality specifically deals with international development, explaining the context in which it is being used in the article. --maclean (talk) 04:26, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, I undid my edit. Congrats on the TFA: Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 19, 2010. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:31, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Taylor Swift discography

Hi Dabomb87, I've had a look in my chart books and unfortunately none of Taylor Swift's releases are in them as she only charted in the UK in 2009 and the books only go up to the end of 2007 (singles) and 2008 (albums). --JD554 (talk) 15:29, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

OK, thanks for looking anyway. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:30, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

objection

Some people object to comments being moved. Some comments were moved to the Obama talk page section a few weeks ago and there were objections.

If possible, do not move my comments (remove them). If you wish, you may say that there were comments listed in archive 8. However, I do not want to look like I added comments on the talk page to start a fight. Judith Merrick (talk) 19:46, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

The talk page is the correct place for the comments. I guarantee you nobody is looking at archive8. The talk page is far more visible. FAR pages are for the FAR process and not general discussion. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:52, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

You may begin a discussion about the foreign policy section but I am not ready for a huge fight. So please don't paste my comments. If you think the comments are good, you can say them in your own words (or even, since there is GFDL) copy some of my proposed wording. Or you can say there were was a discussion in archive 8 and that you think that it is useful to discuss the following points.

Are you wanting to be administrator? If so, show the calm and reasonable side of you. This is your chance to shine. Judith Merrick (talk) 19:55, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Judith, the last thing I want right now is a fight, and I will respect your request not to paste your post on the talk page. I have not even read your comments yet, but they look constructive, so I am not sure why you want them hidden in some FAR page that nobody can see. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:58, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

This is the reason that Wikipedia is so bad. Read my archive 8 suggestions. They are all in good faith. They are not anti-Obama or pro-Obama, just the neutral facts and a pretty good summary for foreign policy. Yet, the response to that is some pretty nasty stuff, accusations of sockpuppetry, threats to block, flimsy logic used to accuse. Calling it disruption is just accusatory. The correct thing to do could have been to point out that the FAR is closed but that there is a time delay between closure and when the blue box is out there to close it. See, that's calm and productive rather than rudeness and accusations.

You can see that I am calm and try to AVOID disruption. I know that the article talk page is a battleground so I try not to inject ideas there. If you think I am bad, then read archive 8 and tell me what suggestion is disruptive and radical. Judith Merrick (talk) 20:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

I understand your confusion, which is why I created Template:FARClosed, so that this situation does not arise in the future. As for everything else, I am not involved in the sockpuppetry case, nor am I particularly interested in that mess. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:15, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

In addition, I never said you or were comments were bad. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:17, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

RFA

DaBomb87, it's time. Dealing with disruption day in and day out wears down the most patient. What are you waiting for? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:48, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Give me some time to reply while I sort out everything that's happened in the past half hour. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:59, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Sort it tomorrow, maybe by then the CUs will get off their arses and stop leaving unnecessary disruption to productive editors. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:12, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

Oh yay! --Andy Walsh (talk) 20:22, 17 March 2010 (UTC)

article v. list intro

• Hey, I have a quick question. When does the intro a list become so large that one should break it off into its own article? I started List of William E. Harmon Award winners from scratch and have been working on it fairly diligently. Am wondering if the intro should be removed and made into a separate article..? • Ling.Nut 03:11, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

There's no concrete rule of thumb; it's a judgement call. You can see that some awards don't have enough information about themselves to be split up (Orange Prize for Fiction has all the info about the award as well as the winners) while others do: Turner Prize has a separate list of winners. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:23, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! and hey, is there a template for titles? I.e., which is preferable: "List of Harmon foundation award for distinguished achievement among Negroes winners" or "List of winners of the Harmon foundation award for distinguished achievement among Negroes"? I now like the latter. It's a pain in the butt because there are at least six different Harmon awards, half by the same foundation, half not. The awards for aviation & "Negro" achievement are famous; other awards less so. • Ling.Nut 04:07, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I like the latter as well, but why not make the title simpler and call it "William E. Harmon Foundation Award for Distinguished Achievement among Negroes", since there is no separate article that is solely about the award? Dabomb87 (talk) 04:13, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

I was thinking of separating the list from the article... seems best to me... • Ling.Nut 04:16, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

HR champs

Sorry that list has lagged behind. The request to add playing time really slowed things down. Staxringold _talk^contribs 00:43, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Dash bot

Pls run your dash bot here: List of United States Military Academy alumni (Union Army). Thanks! — Rlevse • Talk • 21:00, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:18, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

You don't show in the history as an edit. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:00, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Are you sure? [3] Dabomb87 (talk) 03:01, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Ha! ;-) — Rlevse • Talk • 11:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Another user with similar name

A user with a very similar, but not identical, username to yours has recently been editing Far-right politics in the United States and its corresponding talk page; for an example, see [4]. Is this you? Someone purposely trying to impersonate you (which would be a violation of WP policy)? Or just a coincidence? I just thought I should let you know. Stonemason89 (talk) 22:46, 20 March 2010 (UTC)

Looks like a coincidence; this editor created account and started editing in 2005, a couple years before I did. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:53, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Good to know, thanks! Stonemason89 (talk) 18:12, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

FLCs

Hey dude, my activity has been a little restricted lately, various real-life things, but just a quick word to let you know that I reckon the following lists can maybe be closed:

• List of Smithsonian museums
• Venues of the 2010 Winter Olympics
• List of Missouri Tigers head football coaches

I'll do my best in the next two or three days to catch up with the reviewing backlog. If there's anything specific you think I could look at, let me know. Hope all is well with you. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:55, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. I've been quite busy too, but I should get a chance to take a look tomorrow. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:16, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

No worries. Looks like we've got quite a few "stalled" nominations there... not quite sure why. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:18, 21 March 2010 (UTC)

Gunsmoke

Hi. I addressed your comments about the List of Gunsmoke television episodes. Care to take another look? Jimknut (talk) 14:54, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

I've already supported, so not sure what else there is to see ...? Dabomb87 (talk) 21:05, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Sorry about that! The message was actually meant for some one else. I wrote it last night when I was getting bug-eyed from staring at the computer screen for too long. Jimknut (talk) 22:29, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of off-season Atlantic hurricanes/archive1

Good catch. Well off the mark for me. Comments (and opposition) added. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:43, 22 March 2010 (UTC)

FLC Glossary of USSR Russian aviation acronyms

The idea is to assess all the pages together as they all started from one article which got very large. I think you were hasty in removeing the tag and a little more thought could have brought a suitable conclusion. I think you should re-instate the FLC nomination and assess all the listed articles as though theyw ere one!!!!!!!Petebutt (talk) 12:59, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

I think it's a bit unfair to assume that reviewers would know to do that from the get-go. I suggest bringing this up at WT:FLC first before re-nominating. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:00, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Okay fair enough!Petebutt (talk) 13:02, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Consistency

We need consistency — Rlevse • Talk • 23:53, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Not sure what you're getting at. There's nothing wrong with the list; I'm explaining why this list is fine. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:56, 23 March 2010 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, misread it. I thought you wrote both those posts. You should uncomment what you just struck out. My point is if the same set up was in CSA list is FL-able, then this is. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:00, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

List of Washington & Jefferson College alumni FLC

I have addressed yours and the rest of the concerns at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Washington & Jefferson College alumni/archive1. Wondering if you would care to re-comment there.--GrapedApe (talk) 02:04, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Brady Bunch episodes/archive1

I'd like to withdraw my nomination of the list Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of The Brady Bunch episodes/archive1 from FLC. I'll be going on an extended WikiBreak, and won't be able to act on suggested changes to make it an FL. Thanks. Jrh7925 (talk) 23:48, 25 March 2010 (UTC)

Canada

A few months ago, you commented on this article's FAR. Would you mind revisiting to see if your concerns have been addressed and if you have further comments? Thanks very much! Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 13:49, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, but I never really made substantial comments, just a few notes. I've been looking in at that FAR every now and then though. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 03:14, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

United States Secretary of Energy‎

I'm very sorry to bother you, but William S. Saturn (talk · contribs) is again being WP:POINTy at United States Secretary of Energy, removing his contributions to the article. By past experience I doubt my doing anything will work and you helped last time on this FL. Thanks, Reywas92^Talk 21:59, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Reywas, you are free to add your own content to the article, but you are being discourteous by restoring my edits that I have chosen to revert. --William S. Saturn (talk) 23:50, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

You are likewise free to add the text that Saturn has deleted, since it is text under a free license. —C.Fred (talk) 23:56, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

And I am equally free to remove it. But restoring it is simply discourteous and disrespectful, which although legally acceptable, is morally wrong. --William S. Saturn (talk) 00:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Removing sourced information from a Featured List on Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia, to make a point is simply discourteous and disrespectful, which although legally acceptable, is morally wrong. I am happy to rewrite the section if you continue to be a rude hypocrite. You have "destroyed the integrity of this page" by removing the information. You seem to be completely ignoring "the moral guidelines we expect other editors to follow" by calling those who prefer articles with leads "morally bankrupt raccoons." Reywas92^Talk 03:29, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Yes I prefer to be a "rude hypocrite." Please rewrite. --William S. Saturn (talk) 04:55, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Reywas and William, please disengage. This discussion is no longer productive. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:51, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Barnstar

see barnstar page 02:16, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

Disgruntled nominator

Apparently the issue Rlevse raised with you previously was not resolved since he has withdrawn both of his nominations in a huff: [5] because people were still telling him what was previously promoted to FL is not acceptable. -MBK₀₀₄ 03:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Archived properly; thanks for the note. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:06, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Correct, I'm tired of the willy nilly standards that change on a whim. What was great 3 weeks ago is now garbage. — Rlevse • Talk • 10:04, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

I don't think anyone ever said it was garbage. Four people suggested that the lead could be improved. The counter-argument was, effectively, simply to say that it's been good enough in the past so ought to be good enough this time too. My understanding is that just because no one has suggested improving a list in a particular way in the past does not mean that no one is allowed to make that suggestion in the future once one such list has got through FLC. If I have completely misunderstood the point of reviewing, I am sure that one of the FL directors will tell me. I think that MBK's description of Rlevse acting "in a huff" is unfortunately accurate, which is disappointing behaviour for someone of his standing and experience, and I hope that he will resubmit the lists for further discussion. Bencherlite^Talk 13:59, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Likewise. — Rlevse • Talk • 23:29, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Oops :) I knew I'd forget/miss something the first time I went through the process. Thanks for following me and cleaning up my messes! Dana boomer (talk) 21:13, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

No problem. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:15, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Little Butte Creek (Rogue River)/archive1.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hello!

Hello Dabomb87, first of all I want to thank you for all your imput regarding my work here in Wikipedia. I have a little problem to fix about the List of number-one Billboard Top Latin Songs from the 1980s, the sortkey that I used for the song "¿Y Quién Puede Ser?" does not work, is there anyhing I could do about it? I think is the only issue to fix about the list. Thank you. Jaespinoza (talk) 19:30, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:42, 30 March 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Medal of Honor recipients/archive2

Its nice to see its finally getting some action, I will try and knock most of those out tonight. --Kumioko (talk) 00:15, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Archive 15

←

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

Archive 21

→

Archive 25