User talk:TonyTheTiger/Archive 55

Archive 50

←

Archive 53

Archive 54

Archive 55

Archive 56

Archive 57

→

Archive 60

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

• News and notes: Executive Director travels; DMCA takedowns; fellowship clarifications; brief news

• In the news: Facebook hack; gender gap; What is the Wikipedia "community"?; brief news

• The Science Hall of Fame: Building a pantheon of scientists from Wikipedia and Google Books

• WikiProject report: WikiWarriors

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Evidence in Shakespeare case moves to a close; Longevity case awaits proposed decision; AUSC RfC

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:44, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Re: 2010 Michigan GAN

No worries. You're a Michigan fan and know what you'd like to see. JKBrooks85 (talk) 06:13, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Congrats

This user helped promote 2010 Michigan Wolverines football team to good article status.

TomCat4680 (talk) 04:34, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

Administrators Noticeboard

Hello. Just wanted to direct you to my final comment on the GA passing section. Regards, Hugahoody (talk) 19:05, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

• News and notes: New General Counsel hired; reuse of Google Art Project debated; GLAM newsletter started; news in brief

• In the news: Wikipedia controversies about Mormon topics examined; brief news

• Gender gap: Widespread discussions about the low participation of women in Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: Stargazing aboard WikiProject Spaceflight

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Open cases: Shakespeare authorship – Longevity; Motions on Date delinking, Eastern European mailing list

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:17, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

Categories and page moves

1. You have brought your own category up for discussion, and the flow seems to be to support the change from TV season to calendar year, so why are you still adding this category everywhere when you will probably have to change them all over? Seems like double work to me. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 12:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

   I have time now to get these articles in dated categories. Many of them previously had not category joining them by date with other articles. I will eventually make sure a move goes smoothly if the cats are renamed.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:59, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

   Fair enough, just looks like you're setting yourself up for double work. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 17:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

   People were questioning whether there are even a lot of season articles. Filling in the cats helps people make better decisions.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 18:57, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

2. You moved several episode lists, please see the discussion at WT:TV-NC. There are several people who disagree that those articles are not "season articles" and are currently not encompassed by the naming conventions. And no consensus has been reached on them. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 12:48, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

   I am now aware of the controversy and will stop moving articles.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:55, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

   Okay, thanks. _Xeworlebi ^(talk) 17:26, 8 February 2011 (UTC)

CfR discussion

Could you weigh in here so that the process can move along more quickly? It can take a couple weeks if nobody chimes in. Thanks! Jrcla2 (talk) 04:23, 9 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Hello! Your submission of United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed. It's fine but I have made a minor suggestion. Please review the comment underneath your nomination's entry. Peter I. Vardy (talk) 11:08, 10 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Darius Morris

Orlady (talk) 00:03, 11 February 2011 (UTC)

Gery Chico GAR?

You alluded to the possibility of going to GAR for the Gery Chico quick-fail. How do you plan to proceed given the response from Wasted Time R? Geread (talk) 05:23, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Actually, WP:GAR says: "If you disagree with a delisting or failed nomination, read the review first. If you can fix the concerns, find them unreasonable, or the review inadequate, it is usually best to renominate the article at Wikipedia:Good article nominations, rather than requesting a community reassessment..." I think I'll just renominate at WP:GAN and see what happens. Geread (talk) 07:13, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Don't worry... I'm working on it. ;) Geread (talk) 07:18, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Hmmm...I thought about going to PR... but don't those take a long time? I was hoping to get Gery Chico and Rahm Emanuel (that's my next project) to GA status before the election. Successfully improving both in 10 days might be a bit unrealistic... but I was hoping to at least catch the beginning of the runoff season, if it even happens. Geread (talk) 07:22, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK for United States Consumer Financial Protection Bureau

Thank you for your help Victuallers (talk) 06:03, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

1974–75 Buffalo Sabres season

Hi Tony, always good to hear from you. Thanks very much for all your help on 1974–75 Buffalo Sabres season. You are the best! Maple Leaf (talk) 14:19, 14 February 2011 (UTC)

February 2011

Welcome to Wikipedia. Everyone is welcome to contribute to the encyclopedia, but when you add or change content, as you did to the article Recovery (Eminem album), please cite a reliable source for the content of your edit. This helps maintain our policy of verifiability. Take a look at Wikipedia:Citing sources for information about how to cite sources and the welcome page to learn more about contributing to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Dan56 (talk) 00:51, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

• News and notes: Foundation report; gender statistics; DMCA takedowns; brief news

• In the news: Wikipedia wrongly blamed for Super Bowl gaffe; "digital natives" naive about Wikipedia; brief news

• Accreditation: Gaining accreditation as Wikimedia photographers at sports events

• WikiProject report: Articles for Creation

• Features and admins: RFAs and active admins—concerns expressed over the continuing drought

• Arbitration report: Proposed decisions in Shakespeare and Longevity; two new cases; motions passed, and more

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 02:40, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

Another M Image Question

Hey Tony. I was wondering if you had any idea of how to get rid of the white background that currently surrounds the Block M I uploaded a while ago. I can't figure out how to get rid of it and it's driving me nuts. Thanks. SCS100 (talk) 05:54, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks. SCS100 (talk) 06:41, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

The King and I

Sorry, I can't comment any further on "The King and I". In my opinion, the Productions section, film section, recordings section and other things you have commented on are inadequately detailed (for an FA, anyhow), but Wehwalt and I have been disagreeing on other articles (to put it mildly), and I can't handle any more stress with him. Allegro (musical) was promoted to FA without adequate review, IMO, as I stayed away. Me and Juliet ditto (GA so far). You can see that his edit summary accuses me of "subtle vandalism" because I added info to The King and I. If you look at my edits, you will see a pattern of my trying to suggest improvements, and his reverting them. I have been working on musicals articles and was one of the people who designed the guidelines for WP:MUSICALS, but Wehwalt doesn't want my advice, and I don't have time to do the research for this article myself, so, I'm going to leave Wehwalt alone. For an idea of what other info can go in a musicals article, see Hair (musical). All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:11, 17 February 2011 (UTC)

I moved part of yesterday's discussion to the Talk:The King and I. It looks like we are making progress. Thanks for all your helpful input on this article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:09, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors

Hi Tony! Thanks for signing the Online Ambassadors interest list; I hope you're still interested in the role. If you want to apply, you can do so at Wikipedia:Online Ambassadors/Apply. I imagine you'll be a shoe-in and could skip all the optional questions.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:38, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

Recent Chicago Wikipedia event

Hi Tony. Are you familiar with the group that organized this recent Chicago Wikipedia event? If not, you might want to get in touch with the local Public Square / Cafe Society folks.--Pharos (talk) 21:46, 18 February 2011 (UTC)

The King and I

Hello, Tony. I made detailed comments on the Productions section, as requested: Here. -- Ssilvers (talk) 02:24, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I will not respond to Wehwalt at the Theatre project, which is obviously the wrong forum. I can tell you that I regard his comments as grossly unfair. He had undertaken to improve and source the article. My additions on January 23 and 24 were merely suggestions for his further consideration. He now calls it a WP:V violation, but I do not think this reflects what our understanding was at the time. His venomous attacks on me do not alter what really happened. -- Ssilvers (talk) 17:41, 19 February 2011 (UTC)

I'm making good progress with the Productions section and just have a couple more productions to flesh out. Then I'll summarize where we're at on it. Would you kindly check the references for that section and make sure that they're formatted to your satisfaction? I wonder if we can reinstate the GA review as soon as I get in the last production info and some info about the film? All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 15:09, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

I've left an update on the talk page of "The King and I". Comments welcome. -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:29, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

IBDB as a reliable source

Hello, Tony. Would you please add your opinion here as to whether you regard the Internet Broadway Database as a WP:Reliable source? I would like to have a clear consensus there either way. Thanks! -- Ssilvers (talk) 23:45, 20 February 2011 (UTC)

Rachel Weisz

Hi Tony, not long ago we were working on the review of Rachel Weisz's article. Me and Gunt50 added to the article the critics review of her performances, which you said that were necessary if we wanted to take the article to FA. could you take a look to say if the article can be nominated to FA right now or needs more work? --Gduwen (talk) 16:10, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

That's good. Should I nominate the article to FA?, or in case that you have some free time, could you point me out if there's something missing?--Gduwen (talk) 20:08, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Re:File:Clint Eastwood Fistful of Dollars.jpg

It's conceivable that it is PD, but more evidence would really be required. J Milburn (talk) 20:15, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Not right now, no. PUF would be the place to send it, if you're interested. J Milburn (talk) 20:45, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

March 2011 GAN backlog elimination drive a week away

WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of March. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 50. This will help editors in restoring confidence to the GAN process as well as actively improving, polishing, and rewarding good content. If you are interested in participating in the drive, please place your name here. Awards will be given out to those who review certain numbers of GANs as well as to those who review the most. On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, we hope we can see you in March. MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 23:55, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello. You have a new message at Swarm's talk page.

• ping.
• x3.
• that...is a lot....of tigers.

Chicago Meetup

Any plans on a Chicago Wikipedia meetup for 2011? Perhaps at eChicago again like last year? I'm in Chicagoland and interested if one happens. --Charles Jeffrey Danoff 16:46, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for responding, fair enough. I'd be down for something quiet (trip to a bar?) during the spring or summer. --Charles Jeffrey Danoff 20:02, 23 February 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Charles Jeffrey Danoff (talk • contribs)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

• News and notes: Gender gap and sexual images; India consultant; brief news

• In the news: Egyptian revolution and Wikimania 2008; Jimmy Wales' move to the UK, Africa and systemic bias; brief news

• Versailles: Six-month residence in the Palace of Versailles for a Wikimedian

• WikiProject report: More than numbers: WikiProject Mathematics

• Features and admins: The best of the week

• Arbitration report: Longevity and Shakespeare cases close; what do these decisions tell us?

• Technology report: Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News

Read this Signpost in full · Single-page · Unsubscribe · EdwardsBot (talk) 18:39, 22 February 2011 (UTC)

Categories

Firstly I have no problem with the work you have been doing in adding categories in some of the articles I watch. I'd just like to let you know of a tool that may be of use to you. HotCat allows you to easily add, remove and edit categories without clicking on the edit button. If you're interested head to the linked page and follow the instructions to enable it in your profile. If you have any questions feel free to ask me. Themeparkgc  Talk  01:26, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Tim Hardaway, Jr.

Hello! Your submission of Tim Hardaway, Jr. at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! KimChee (talk) 11:28, 28 February 2011 (UTC)

WikiCup 2011 February newsletter

So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.

Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.

Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 23:52, 28 February 2011 (UTC)