User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

FAS current FACs number

Thanks for checking WP:FAS. I had a question about the Current FACs number (you changed it from my 39, which was wrong, to 43). First off I assume it is supposed to be as of midnight on August 31 / Sept 1, so some calculations are needed. I checked and there are currently 24 + 20 = 44 articles at Wikipedia:FAC, but 5 of those have been added since August 31, so 44 - 5 = 39. Next two articles were removed by promotion - see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/September 2011 so 39 + 2 = 41, finally three articles at FAC were archived to date in September per Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Archived nominations/September 2011, so 41 + 3 = 44. So I think the number should be 44 (not 43). Or did I miss something? Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 21:01, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Did you discount the malformed nomination of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Vidkun Quisling/archive1, which was a nomination of an article already at FA status? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:30, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Nope, missed that one - thanks so much. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:31, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:V

Hi Dabomb, your recent full protection of V has expired, leaving it unprotected, and the anon edits have resumed. Would you mind restoring the indefinite semi-protection Courcelles added? SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 02:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:27, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks, SlimVirgin ^{TALK|CONTRIBS} 02:50, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

Almirante Latorre

Thanks for scheduling this for today. Just from the number of edits it has received, I think it may have actually received many views. :-) Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:22, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

see barnstar page 03:39, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Universoul Circus

Thank you for reviewing the protection request for this page recently. What generally is the benchmark for the level of activity needed to substantiate protection? I ask this as it gets tiresome to go back every couple of months to change it back from the same basic public relations verbiage from their website. Thanks! Dizziewiki (talk) 15:47, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

There is useful information on WP:RFPP.--Wehwalt (talk) 16:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

There are no references on the page that regard what frequency of changes/ vandalization/ sockpuppetry constitute reason for protection.Dizziewiki (talk) 16:43, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

There is no set level, as I consider the article and type of edits made (among other things) when looking into protection requests, but there usually does have to be recent disruption for me to protect (e.g., three or four bad edits in the past few days or a steady smaller stream of vandalism over a week or two). Here, Universoul Circus hadn't even been edited since June before yesterday. Dabomb87 (talk) 20:44, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

see barnstar page 20:50, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

Template

I've made a wikiproject and i need help,

Here's link:-- Wikipedia:WikiProject Wikipedia in Schools

I Need you to make sure spellings right but also help me make a template for it.

But if you can do anything I would be very happy.

    :)

Bobherry talk -- Hi!! 00:18, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

AWSOMENESS

You have to see this!!!! http://en.wikichecker.com/user/?t=Dabomb87

Bobherry talk -- Hi!! 02:41, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Invite+help

Joining my wikiproject

Wondering How make a userpage for others

Bobherry talk -- Hi!! 17:54, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Page move request

I have an uncontroversial page move request for you. Could you please move Lamar Cardinals men's basketball to Lamar Cardinals basketball? When a school's basketball programs have different nicknames for the men and women, the gender becomes redundant and gets dropped. In this case, Lamar Cardinals (men) versus Lamar Lady Cardinals. I appreciate the help in advance. Jrcla2 (talk) 22:23, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 15:36, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 19:50, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Hubert Walter TFA...

Can it be any day BUT this weekend? (16th, 17th, 18th)? I'm going to be at an art festival most of the weekend and won't be available for dealing with the inevitable... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:25, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

OK, I'll move it. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:18, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Very disenchanted

See this PumpkinSky talk 17:46, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Don't be. Just try to negotiate your way through it. As you say, outside of meeting the criteria, people will have different opinions on what should and should not be included. If you don't get the support of a certain reviewer, not to worry, just work on and keep being positive. The Rambling Man (talk) 17:48, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That's bunk. I can not satisfy contradictory desires. This is total bunk. There should be standards for this sort of thing.PumpkinSky talk 17:51, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

No it isn't, it's natural that a process like FLC etc will draw different opinions. The criteria are key, after that, it's personal opinion, and perhaps reviewers need to be reminded from time to time what's really important! The Rambling Man (talk) 17:59, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

I know you're trying to help but this is impossible, to satisfy opposite views. Submitters shouldn't have to endure this, experienced reviewers should know what is required and what is simply their trying to force this non-required views off as requirements.PumpkinSky talk 18:01, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Dude, I've left a note at the FLC about it. Let's continue the discussion there. And please try to remain positive! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:04, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

(edit conflict) I understand your frustration, but this is part of the FLC process. Just politely explain to reviewers why their concerns are not actionably, and one of the directors will intepret consensus accordingly. Complaints not based on Wikipedia policies or the FL criteria are given little weight. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:06, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

That's good to know, Dabomb. I thought we had to satisfy everyone. Thanks guys at least I feel better. I find the featured process very frustrating at times, it can also be incredibly slow. My first list was on the page only 2.5 weeks. This one's been there over a month.PumpkinSky talk 18:10, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

We simply don't have an adequate number of reviewers right now. Fingers crossed this will change as we head into the northern hemisphere autumn/winter where people will be more inclined to stay indoors and edit Wikipedia than go out in the sunshine! The Rambling Man (talk) 18:14, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

More BS PumpkinSky talk 11:43, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Now I know why so many people avoid featured processes and/or leave wiki in droves. My list is up for over a month and now Reywas and Violet (who hasn't said squat for weeks) come out of nowhere and raise a ruckus over stuff everyone else was fine. This is bunk. I'm about to withdraw this nom. I had several Montana FLs planned but it's not worth the crap. No wonder wiki has the horrible reputation it does on there among non-editors. When I told people I know I decided to give editing a try they were like "Are you joking?". Now I know why. My stutterers FL only took 2.5 weeks and was smooth. What's going on in this one is ridiculous.PumpkinSky talk 19:19, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

You rock

see barnstar page

Thanks Sandy. I'm still learning some of the nuances of the role, as you can tell. I definitely have a newfound respect for the work Raul has done for the 7 years that TFA has been running. Dabomb87 (talk) 03:56, 24 September 2011 (UTC)

You do rock - keep up the great work! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:06, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for protecting Lumbini ! DBhuwanSurfer 22:42, 25 September 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by DBSSURFER (talk • contribs)

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39