User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 37

Archive 30

←

Archive 35

Archive 36

Archive 37

Archive 38

Archive 39

Archive 40

Tkach

I get three. There's no diversity point because we go strictly by the categories at WP:FA. I haven't looked back to check when the last religious leader was to make main page.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:50, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Sweeps August update

Thanks to everyone's dedicated efforts to the GA Sweeps process, a total of 215 articles were swept in July! We are currently nearly 80% done with Sweeps, with under 600 articles left to review. With 50 members, that averages out to about 12 articles per person. Once the remaining articles drop to 100, I'll help in reviewing the last articles (I'm currently taking a break). If each member reviews an article every other day this month (or several!), we'll be completely finished. Again, I want to thank you for using your time to ensure the quality of the older GAs. Feel free to recruit other editors who have reviewed GANs in the past and might be interested in the process. The more editors, the less the workload, and hopefully the faster this will be completed. If you have any questions about reviews or the process let me know and I'll be happy to get back to you. Again, thank you for taking the time to help with the process, I appreciate your efforts! --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 19:36, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Good job. Feel free to post it on the Sweeps main page for reviewers and possible new reviewers to see it. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:57, 7 August 2009 (UTC)

All-Star Final Vote

I think it meets FL standards again. One thing that needs to be fixed is that the lead needs to be updated; this year's Final Vote is referred to in the future tense. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:43, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and the images need alternative text. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:44, 1 August 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

Tony, I must apologize - I have been quite busy in real life and when I just went to Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inauguration of Barack Obama/archive3 just now I found it had been closed. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:51, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I will take a closer look - I had (re)read part of the article and it looks better. I'll make comments on the talk page. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:08, 3 August 2009 (UTC)

I closed the MickeyD's Bike hut PR per your request, ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:35, 5 August 2009 (UTC)

I didn't notice it either. I've been distracted. Sorry.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:46, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 3 August 2009

• News and notes: WMF elections, strategy wiki, museum partnerships, and much more
• Wikipedia in the news: Dispute over Rorschach test images, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:40, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Articles for deletion nomination of Babette March

I have nominated Babette March, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Babette March. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. Damiens.rf 12:38, 4 August 2009 (UTC)

Might interest you, kinda an offshoot from Saxbe fix

Albert Levitt--Wehwalt (talk) 18:45, 6 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Template:CBB Schedule Entry

I guess I don't exactly understand your question left on my talk page. The template used for the Michigan season does have a place for high points, assists, and rebounds. I understood that you wanted optional ones, but they are already there. Hatmatbbat10Talk to me 21:29, 8 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Jasmin Ouschan

On August 9, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Jasmin Ouschan, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) 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.

WP:DYK 02:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

[1] I know it took forever, but I appreciate your patience!! Between a death in the family, 2 eye bleeds, 3 migraines and another (new) family illness, I didn't think you'd ever get to say it, either. This would be why I don't tackle these sorts of projects too often. By the way, I thought about merging the ONE Campaign sentence in the previous paragraph, but I wasn't sure. Thanks again! Wildhartlivie (talk) 07:04, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Babette March

I added a little bit. I might try to add more later, unless you want to. Zagalejo^^^ 22:12, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

Trump Tower - apologies

I do apologise for the time it's taking me to work through the peer review. I have a lot of distractions at the moment, both on and off wiki; I may have to go away for a couple of days, and it's been very difficult to find time for everything. I have not forgotten the article, and will finish the review (I'm gong to give it a little time right now), so please be patient. Brianboulton (talk) 22:14, 9 August 2009 (UTC)

FAR for Ann Arbor

I have nominated Ann Arbor, Michigan for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here.

GA reassessment of Chicago Theatre

I have conducted a reassessment of the above article as part of the GA Sweeps process. I have found a number concerns with the article which you can see at Talk:Chicago Theatre/GA1. You are being nominated as you have more than 7 non-minor edits to the article. I have placed the article on hold whilst these are fixed. Thanks. Jezhotwells (talk) 12:58, 10 August 2009 (UTC)

• Hi Tony, I've just had the time to revisit this article and notice that you appear to have fixed many things. Can you tell me exactly what I can do to help? Please respond here - I will be watching.--VirtualSteve ^{need admin support?} 05:23, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

• Since leaving the above message I have made one minor adjustment. I am however struck by the thought (when reading the article in full) as to why we alternate between "theatre" and "theater" in the spelling of this word. Do you think that we should adjust to follow one spelling - say "theatre" or is this a quirk of American English that I do not understand?--VirtualSteve ^{need admin support?} 05:31, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 10 August 2009

• Special story: Tropenmuseum to host partnered exhibit with Wikimedia community
• News and notes: Tech news, strategic planning, BLP task force, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Shrinking community, GLAM-Wiki, and more
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 06:05, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

SISE discussion

Thought this might interest you.  Mbinebri  ^{talk ←} 20:14, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

File:Pokerstars 20051215 Check.jpg listed for deletion

An image or media file that you uploaded or altered, File:Pokerstars 20051215 Check.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why this is (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry), if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Damiens.rf 21:16, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: Timothy Blackstone

Not quite yet, that's not why I moved it. I moved it because of this - rst20xx (talk) 22:17, 11 August 2009 (UTC)

SFO GAR

Re: [2]

I'll try to address the alt image issue, but it's my first time with ALT images so bear with me on that. I'm not sure I have it in me to address the more difficult unreferenced statements and structure issues, but I'll let you know by Friday. It looks like this article got by on lesser standards and has now had various information tacked on by other writers over time. Thanks for all your feedback and assistance so far. -Optigan13 (talk) 05:04, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Historic district maps

If I remember rightly, you've used OpenStreetMap to create maps of historic districts on the National Register of Historic Places. Do I remember rightly? If not, my apologies for confusing you with someone else, and ignore the rest of this note :-) Before I discovered your work, I had independently done the same thing: see File:Bridgewater Historic District map (Pennsylvania).png and File:Beaver Historic District map.png; however, I've not found any good way in which to use them. A couple of questions, therefore: (1) Any idea how many of these maps you've created? (2) Have you found a good way in which to use them on district articles? Nyttend (talk) 21:48, 13 August 2009 (UTC)

Re: LivingBot unreliable

You have my unreserved apologies. I've been monitoring it recently, as it seemed to stop working overnight, with no interaction from me (highly unusual). Then the toolserver went down, so I couldn't get it working at all. The problem seems to lie with the automated process - manual override works fine and you can even use it yourself ( http://toolserver.org/~jarry/lister.php?ignoretime=y ). I'll be working on the problem in the mean time, of course. Sorry for any disruption!

Edit: I notice that things seem to have stabilised by themselves but, as you say, reliability is a neccessity, so I'll be on the look out.

- Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 15:12, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I must be typing too fast! Still, on balance I think that you should be able to just ignore all that lot ^^^ now that things are getting better. Cheers, - Jarry1250 ^{[ In the UK? Sign the petition! ]} 15:37, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Alt text issues

I edited Template:Infobox NBAretired to add an alt= parameter.

I proposed, and an admin installed, a fix to Template:Cr to make it more accessible.

I don't see a problem with the alt text checker's analysis of the Washington Metro article; perhaps the problem has been fixed? (Or maybe I'm just slow....) Eubulides (talk) 15:53, 14 August 2009 (UTC)

Sorry about bothering you with those templates; I mistakenly responded to the wrong person. Eubulides (talk) 00:20, 16 August 2009 (UTC)

article history

When updating article history, please scroll to the bottom of the talk page to make sure the red error category isn't lit. [3] Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:33, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Vogue Covers

No, I never look at articles which were mentioned in the nomination and didn't bother of course to look myself at where the templates were being used...... Of course I did. I responded at the TFD, it still is template clutter. Garion96 (talk) 09:13, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Rod Blagojevich Merger Proposal

I just wanted to let you that I mentioned your previous comments regarding the "Merger Proposal" relating to the Rod Blagojevich articles and two related articles in a discussion on the pending matter with User:NickDupree. Your previous comments I am referring to are at Talk:Rod Blagojevich. --TommyBoy (talk) 11:49, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

PR archiving

Hi Tony, all Peer review archiving is now done by a bot. Things less than 30 days old are archived after 14 days of inactivity (no edits - I think minor edits do not count here as activity either). After 30 days the bot archives things that have gone 2 days without any edits / activity (again I think minor edits do not count as activity). Wikipedia:Peer review/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)/archive1 opened on July 21st, and the last comment was today, so it will not be archived until the 21st or 22nd at the earliest (assumes no new edits, the bot runs at 10:00 GMT lately but I forgot to check if the PR opened before or after 10:00 on July 21st). After the 21st as long as an edit is made every two days the PR will stay open indefinitely. So you can keep it open as long as you need to, and as long as edits are being made at least every 2 days after the 21st.

I am reading McDonald's Cycle Center for comments, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 13:07, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Vogue templates

Yeah, I'm odd. I format the untidy. Not that interested in squabbles over content. If it goes, it goes. Nothing is worth getting all het up about. TheAllSeeingEye (talk) 13:56, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the message, Tony. I contributed previously missing information to these templates when I happened to find a good source, but I don't have a strong opinion either way about the proposed deletion. –CapitalLetterBeginning (talk) 15:44, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

I disagree; my abstention is just that – an abstention. Indeed, if I had to make a choice, I'd say I'm slightly in favour of deletion (list articles would probably be preferable), but only very slightly. Hence no "strong opinion". –CapitalLetterBeginning (talk) 11:35, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Top Importance Peer Review

You suggested that I take the articles for Top Importance peer review to wp:pr They seem to only what to peer review article that are nominated for FA. The instructions within the Chicago Project says, "no member should give this rating (Top Importance) to any Chicago article without first getting Project approval from the other members." Do you want the Chicago Project instructions changed? Pknkly (talk) 07:10, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Babette March

On August 17, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Babette March, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) 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.

King of ♥ ♦ ♣ ♠ 14:17, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hi there. I know you've written several GAs about athletes. Do you think Toney Douglas is near GA status? I still have to add college recruitment information, and will wait until the start of the NBA season for more information about his pro career, but is it generally in good shape? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 15:42, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your reply; I replied on my talk page. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:36, 17 August 2009 (UTC)

I finally realize what you mean, but too late. Is there any way I can re-gain access? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:04, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

OK, that worked. Now, where is the permalink? Dabomb87 (talk) 19:12, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

I have asked someone, but they have not replied yet. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:25, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

How is the lead now? Dabomb87 (talk) 00:53, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 17 August 2009

• From the editor: Where should the Signpost go from here?
• Radio review: Review of Bigipedia radio series
• News and notes: Three million articles, Chen, Walsh and Klein win board election, and more
• Wikipedia in the news: Reports of Wikipedia's imminent death greatly exaggerated, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 04:41, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-08-17/Discussion report

Your thanks ought to go to Hiding I'm afraid, the sum of my contribution to the article was approximately three sentences relating to the Ireland poll. It's news to me that I'm credited! --Kwekubo (talk) 19:22, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-08-17/Discussion report

Thanks for the words. I'm sorry the extra coverage didn't result in opinions to your taste, but I think it's important to get the spotlight on deletion discussions just to make sure the outcomes reflect as wide a consensus as possible. When you think, it's staggering they've never really been covered by the Signpost before, at least to my knowledge, considering their importance. Hiding T 19:50, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

DYK for Sixteen (Chicago restaurant)

On August 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sixteen (Chicago restaurant), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) 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.

EncycloPetey (talk) 22:00, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

GA Review Shark

Hi, I have been on vacation but will be back in a few days, please give me afew days to see what can be fixed. --Stefan ^talk 02:40, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

A worried editor watching a reviewer at work.

Non-tiger image

Hi there, sorry if I seemed a bit intransigent during the amino acid GAR review. We have quite different views about how useful describing diagrams in words are to people, and I admit some of your comments rubbed me up the wrong way. However, your copy-editing has fixed some poorly-written parts of the article, so your efforts have really been very helpful. Please accept this kitten photo as a peace offering (he's called Nano). Tim Vickers (talk) 20:56, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Cato June

Hey. Maybe you could enlighten me on an issue I'm noticing. I saw that the Cato June article was 133kb, so I did a quick check on it. While the prose is a solid 28kb, the references were a rather frightening 84kb in size. Obviously references are a good thing, but I think this is overkill, given that June isn't really that controversial. So, what I'm going to do the next couple days is checked multiple-referenced areas and try to trim off some that aren't needed. If I can knock it down to 75kb, that's still huge but it would be more readable to the casual user then. Hopefully there's no objections to me doing this, if there is let me know. Wizardman 14:48, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

It sounds crazy, I know. I don't think I've seen an article that I would consider to be overreferenced before. For the reason of it being so rare, I don't think there's anything on too many references. Maybe I'm overanalyzing this, I just have never seen any article with 80kb+ in references (I looked through a few Obama articles and even they fall under), and that makes an impact in page load time. I won't do too much with it, but it's a special case so I'm just trying to see how to approach it. Wizardman 22:28, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Clinton's only got about 50kb and Kemp 61kb. But fair enough, I won't push it. Granted, it a sentence has five references and one sums the whole thing up i may still remove a couple in those instances. Wizardman 22:55, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Trump Tower (Chicago) Peer review

If the bot should close the review, I will still continue to discuss the article with you on the talk page, until we have resolved the outstanding issues. Brianboulton (talk) 16:43, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

Talk:Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago/GA2

There have been concerns about the depth of coverage in this article. I will check back in seven days to look at progress. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 23:31, 21 August 2009 (UTC)

I have delisted Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago as you suggested. I have provided a {{find}} template on the talkpage and some links on the architect's work on the building, so if you have an interest in the topic you may wish to improve the article a little by adding some content before going to another GAR. Regards SilkTork *^YES! 21:46, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Four Award

Tony, I want to thank you for nominating me for the "Four Award" as a result of my work in the Puerto Ricans in World War II article. I was told by Savidan that it was you who nominated me. It was a pleasant surprise to see it posted in my "talk", since I had no idea that such an award existed. I won't take up more of your time, so take care. Tony the Marine (talk) 01:34, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image (File:Self-portrait as the black Jimmy Connors in the finals of the New Negro Escapist Social and Athletic Club Summer Tennis Tournament.jpg)

⚠

Thanks for uploading File:Self-portrait as the black Jimmy Connors in the finals of the New Negro Escapist Social and Athletic Club Summer Tennis Tournament.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of "file" pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. FileBot (talk) 21:28, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Black Sox Scandal TI rating and thanks

Yes, I'm holding onto my assessment. I reviewed it again and the article still doesn't have international impact. Additionally, the article is important to only baseball fans or maybe American sports fans. By the way, thanks for making the changes to the Importance definition. Pknkly (talk) 22:02, 22 August 2009 (UTC)

Opinion on possible linkspam

Please see and respond at User talk:Pknkly#Would this be wp:linkspam Thanks in advance. Pknkly (talk) 00:49, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll try it. Pknkly (talk) 01:03, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

RE: Jesse Jackson Vandalism (?)

Dear Sir,

Vandalism? While I am confused about your outrageous message and revert, I accept that you have the right to do so. While I do also agree that there are some people that are "trigger-happy" when it comes to reverting certain things. This is why MANY schools and teachers DO NOT accept work done by students who used Wikipedia as a source for their papers/research. I would suggest getting the facts BEFORE you make uncontionable actions. The FACT is that Jesse Jackson was enthroned as the Crown Prince of the Agni People. That is SIMPLE fact. If there continues to be a problem here, I will have no problem contact Wikipedia directly and notifying some managers of your problem with simple facts being added to Reverend Jacksons page. Mr. Jackson "succeeded" Michael Jackson in death, and that is a major life occurrence my the dear Reverend's life. You stated that I made unconstructive edits to Wikipedia," which is obviously not the case. I made a constructive edit to his page, given that he succeeded a major star in his position as Crown prince of a tribal people. I am sensing a hint of anti-royalty, which is where people are against royalty, and so they revert certain articles solely for being having to do with royalty. That, my dear sir, is VANDALISM.

Please, take care and observe care and research before you revert or send senseless messages.

Lskr (talk) 01:34, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you, "Tony" for reverting your revert. I very much appreciate your knowledge and watch-out for the dear Reverends page. :) I am sorry if ANYTHING I said was out of line, but I just get VERY defensive of fellow African Americans. I myself am a Chief, and so to have someone delete certain things of a fellow Prince, angered me, especially because the edits I made were in truth and fact. I sincerely appologize for being overbearing if I was. Take care. Lskr (talk) 21:48, 23 August 2009 (UTC)

McDonald's Cycle Center

Thanks, I have the FAC watchlisted and was planning to take another look at it once all of Ottava's points were dealt with. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:16, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

• I added the very last of it. Except for the one phrase that was too close, everything in the article now checks out (I went ahead and further paraphrased two bits of it to get further from the source). I should be able to support the sourcing of the article once you go ahead and finish. Ottava Rima (talk) 00:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Just notify me when it comes up. If you covered my last points, then I owe you a support based on sourcing. Ottava Rima (talk) 01:27, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I will be glad to look at it again before it goes to FAC again. Please let me know - sorry it closed when it did. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:42, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

My apologies for not coming back before the archival; I got another message on my talk page shortly after your last and never checked for any previous posts until now. For the record, I was close to supporting, but was trying to wait for some of the extended discussions to be completed. Giants2008 (17–14) 03:18, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago) PR

Okay, I added succession boxes for "Building with the highest residence" and "Second-tallest building in the United States". I personally like the inclusion of the latter, although some editors may disagree at FAC and label it an "almost title" that shouldn't be listed. For the tallest formwork building in the world, I had trouble because I found no information about what building held the title before it, and whether or not the Burj Dubai now holds the title (when a building will already gain the title of tallest building in the world, there usually isn't as much information on "lesser" titles such as tallest concrete building in the world, etc). I'll keep looking, but I don't expect to find much... What do you think? Cheers, Rai•me 14:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

No problem. That list isn't reliably sourced, but the taller concrete structures that are listed are both towers and not buildings, so they wouldn't take the title of "tallest formwork building". Cheers, Rai•me 15:52, 24 August 2009 (UTC)

Rogers

You are kiding me? The excised material is so irrelevant to a reader say from Portugal that I laughed when I read it, and I don't llive in Portugal. Who indeed gives a hoot about this guy's exploits in a gym with a basketball? It'd be great feature fodder in the now dead VIBE magazine, but not too many other places, save the sports section of a Chicago tabloid.SLY111 (talk) 18:47, 24 August 2009 (UTC)SLY111

Rogers II

Proves my point. In a feature piece, I admit the need to provide "color" so the reader doesn't sleep through what in fact makes the subject worthy of print space. What I excised occurred to me to be peacockry - and at double the lenght it might merit. So it goes. Thanks.SLY111 (talk) 19:12, 24 August 2009 (UTC)SLY111

Length of Articles

TonyTheTiger, I got the message that you left on my talk page a couple weeks ago about the length of articles you've been writing. I agree with your critics that articles, such as the one for Cato June, are probably too long. While I generally don't support deleting any valid, well-styled, and cited content from the body of an article, the lead for Cato June's is certainly too long. It should probably be a single paragraph of 3-4 sentences. Take a look at articles for far more significant historical characters, e.g. US presidents such as Dwight D. Eisenhower, who have had for more complex and historically important lives than someone like Cato June. The lead for Eisenhower's article is just two short paragraphs, while the one for June's is about 3-4 times as long. Your painstaking work is certainly appreciated, but the leads should be shorter.

Jweiss11 (talk) 21:14, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

My opinion hasn't been solicited here, but I figured I'd give it anyway... I don't think Cato June is too long -- everything is sourced, so the media has taken the resources and effort to write the exact same amount of information about the individual. As for the lead, it could definitely be trimmed (it should just be a broad overview, and there are more specific details than necessary), but three to four paragraphs is certainly appropriate for the length of the main body. Jweiss, please see WP:LEAD#Length -- the article is about 28,000 characters, so the lead should be three or four paragraphs. The example of Eisenhower does not hold, because that is, frankly, a poorly formatted article. The fact that relative unknown Cato June has a great article and Dwight Eisenhower has a mediocre one is a debate for elsewhere. There are plenty of well-written, extensively sourced Featured Articles on arguably undeserving pop culture figures and works (musicians, actors, video games, etc.).

I will agree with Wizardman though, that the references need to be trimmed. There is no need for redundant citations, especially for uncontroversial statements. For instance, "At the 2004 Colts training camp, June competed with Keyon Whiteside for the starting weakside linebacker position.[96][97]" Why does that need two references? Surely each reference supports the entire statement made, so they are redundant. Here are a couple more: "but the Colts made him a $1.55 million tender offer on March 2.[134][136]", and "June recorded an interception and touchdown return in the Buccaneers' third preseason game against the Miami Dolphins.[176][177]"

While I think the article isn't too long, per se, I do think there are a few trivial tidbits that should be removed. For instance, I don't think information on his tattoos is relevant, and I don't see the relevance of "By the time June was a Redshirt Sophomore, his high school had produced 10 NFL athletes.[21]" or the reasoning behind that being under the "Personal" section. Strikehold (talk) 22:46, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I might as well just respond here. Often in two newspaper towns, I try to add both newspaper's stories on any given fact. I don't recall about each specific fact that you cite, but that is possibly the explanation.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:00, 25 August 2009 (UTC)

I can understand that being a good rule of thumb when a statement might be either controversial or one of opinion. For instance, it may show agreement between two different politically oriented sources (e.g. The Washington Post and The Washington Times, or The Chicago Tribune and The Chicago Sun-Times). It could also be useful to someone interested in further reading or more in-depth analysis or research. However, I think those things only hold when the statement is potentially controversial or opinionated. If it is a statement of indisputable fact or of a trivial nature, then it is really not necessary. I think those examples I cited above fall into those categories.

I still think these redundant references should be removed for both technical and stylistic reasons. First, a good portion of users still have slow or dial-up internet services, and a large amount of the (data) size of that article is taken up by references. Second, multiple references for a statement can be, in my opinion, a little jarring in appearance as they break up the text, especially when there are multiple references of triple-digit numbers. Also, the actual "References" section takes up about one-half of the article length. More importantly, it might cause confusion. For instance, a reader might wonder why a simple statement would need to be backed by multiple references as it could indicate a non-existent controversy about what is truly a statement of neutral fact.

As an aside, I understand some people seem to be critical about this article, so I just wanted to say I think you did an outstanding job on it. Like I've said above, my concerns are mostly technical. I commend the amount of work you've put into writing a high-quality article. Strikehold (talk) 09:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Counties concern

I don't think your concern is actionable, sorry Tony. I've looked through all my sources before, but none mention the epicenter. The map seems to point towards it being in Hardin County. Unless you think I can use the map as a source? ceranthor 10:25, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

I stand corrected, Ruslik posted the information. ceranthor 10:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Hey, do you have any other concerns towards improving the article? Feel free to list them, I'm all for improving it! ceranthor 21:02, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Pokerstars image

Please check your email, the information you need is there. Keegan (talk) 20:44, 26 August 2009 (UTC)

Re:College Basketball Template

I have not worked much with that template so I'm not sure if I can help you. I am very busy these days and don't get on Wiki as much anymore. I'm afraid I'm not the person to ask, sorry. Hatmatbbat10Talk to me 02:23, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Amino acid alt text

I just now looked at the alt text for Amino acid, and it looks OK to me. It's true that it assumes some knowledge of chemistry, but chemical diagrams are likely to be complete gibberish to someone who lacks that knowledge, and we don't want the alt text to be complete gibberish. In cases like these it is probably more helpful to describe the image over the telephone to someone else who knows a modicum of chemistry (enough to know formulas, albeit not enough to know the article) than to describe the image over the telephone to someone who knows nothing about chemistry at all.

To some extent this is an exception to WP:ALT#Verifiability, in that some general expertise is being assumed, but I don't see any other reasonable way out of it.

I'm thinking that WP:ALT#Diagrams needs a discussion of chemical diagrams. I'll see what I can do on that topic. Eubulides (talk) 09:50, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

re: YATBox

Hi, What exactly would the task be? Right now, I'm still waiting for access to the toolserver, so it may take up to a month from now to get a task officially running. AHRtbA== ^Talk 17:45, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Washington Metro

Thanks for finishing that one up! Somehow that one fell off my radar:( DMacks (talk) 22:12, 27 August 2009 (UTC)

Trump Tower review comments

I have left a few final comments on the peer review page. Anything above the line of dollar signs I've drawn can be considered settled. I forgot to mention one thing: any chance of the "pop culture" details being absorbed into other sections of the article, rather than in a main section of their own? Such sections often mean trouble at FA. I imagine you're not going to nominate the article for a week or so, so I'll keep watching it and give it any odd tweak that might improve it. Genrally, though, I'd say it's in pretty good shape. Brianboulton (talk) 17:31, 28 August 2009 (UTC)

Chicago Top Importance quota

Tony - Lets discuss quota at user talk:Pknkly#Chicago Top Importance quota. Pknkly (talk) 05:55, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Newsbank request

Can you go to the following link in this URL: [4] and look for the title "Early-years DVDs of the show about nothing are something else"? I need the page number for that article. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 17:44, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

If you look at the link I provided above, you'll find a link to an article titled "The 'Seinfeld' laugh tracks Early-years DVDs of the show about nothing are something else" (number 3). I need you to use your Newsbank subscription to access that article and find its page number. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:39, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Dabomb87 (talk) 19:15, 29 August 2009 (UTC)

Apologies

If I stepped over some bounds with the frustration comment, I apologize. I was probably making an assumption based on your question, "I will ask again has there ever been a 3500+character lead that was not too long?", repeated three or four times in less than two hours.[5] [6] [7] I only know that, if that were me, it would be a sign of frustration. But I had no right to presume, and again, I apologize.

I'm going to go back now and reply to your comments. Cheers! Unschool 04:43, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

User:Xenobot Mk V chicago task

See User talk:Xeno#WP:CHICAGO tagging (about the band, also below, wrt: auto-assessing). –xeno^talk 21:26, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

FDR lead

Hey, I don't have time to polish it, but do let me know what you think of the general appearance of the new lead at FDR. Unschool 23:57, 30 August 2009 (UTC)

Alex Magnum

Take a look, let me know what you think. Unschool 03:39, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia Signpost: 24 August 2009

• News and notes: $500,000 grant, Wikimania, Wikipedia Loves Art winners
• Wikipedia in the news: Health care coverage, 3 million articles, inkblots, and more
• Discussion report: Discussion Reports and Miscellaneous Articulations
• Features and admins: Approved this week
• Arbitration report: The Report on Lengthy Litigation
• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe

Delivered by SoxBot (talk) at 07:00, 31 August 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Pavilion projects

The article Pavilion projects you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Pavilion projects for eventual comments about the article. Well done! --The New Mikemoral ♪♫ 23:28, 31 August 2009 (UTC)