Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 16:00, 18 November 2009

If you want me to look at an article or a FAC, please provide the link.

If you are unsure if a FAC is closed, please see WP:FAC/ar.

To leave me a message, click here.

Template:FixBunching

Archives

2006 · 2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013–2015 · 2016–2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · FA archive sorting · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 Jan–Mar (DCGAR) · 2023 Apr–Aug · 2023 Aug–Dec · 2023 Seasons greetings · 2024 · 2025

Template:FixBunching

Template:FixBunching

Template:FixBunching

Communism

Dear Sandy, I know that you usually deal with the best of articles and not with the low-end ones, but you are one of the few experienced editors I know here and I feel that your advice and help could perhaps solve my problem. The problem is about the article Communism. I think that it is in a bad shape now - a rather unbalanced and POV list of communist sects, not a systematic explanation. I invested many hours to improve it (you know that I lived long years under a Communist govt so I am very interested in this matter) and my new version stuck for some time (this is the last version of it, after many colleagues changed it in this or that way). After some moths, an editor reverted it without previous discussion to the older version. I tried to revert back, but another editor, Bobisbob2, asserted that "my" version is not neutral enough and reverted again. I tried to discuss it (see Talk:Communism#Reverts to the previous version) but nobody else appeared and Bobisbob2 looks like a more able edit warrior than myself.

So my first question is: As an independent observer, do you think that "my" version is clearly better than Bobisbob2's? Perhaps I deceive myself and my text is really not as good as I think... And if you think that the current version is worse, what would you suggest me to do?

Thank you for your time. Best wishes,--Ioannes Pragensis (talk) 22:11, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

I have to think on this, Ioannes. I had a similar, unfruitful experience at Hugo Chavez, and finally decided to walk away, so my advice could be biased by personal experience and the lack of Venezuelan Wiki editors to help out there. Good to hear from you, and I see we have a Chess article proposed at WP:TFA/R; we should hear more from you folks in the FA department! I'll think on this and get back to you. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:29, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand your advice, Sandy. But on the other side, Communism is a too important theme to be left to communists. Much more important than a minor chess master from the 19th century. It would be really nice if you (or another experienced editor) could compare the two versions of Communism a tell me which one is better. Best regards,--Ioannes Pragensis (talk) 08:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Denton, Texas FAC

Hello SandyGeorgia. I know that you are extremely busy, but I'd just like to ask you about Denton, Texas, which you recently archived. I think I have resolved each reviewer's concerns, although I think I may not have directly responded to a couple of them (which is my mistake). Since the initial FAC, I've added more references throughout the article and especially to the Geography section that Juliancolton commented on. Alt text was added to the one image that didn't have it. I think I've fixed all issues Ealdgyth discovered.

I'd like to get this to featured article status, but I'm not sure what issues need resolving before re-nominating again. I just don't see any issues in the now failed FAC that are unresolved.

Relevant links

• Denton, Texas
• Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Denton, Texas/archive1
• List of changes since FAC posting

Regards, Mahanga 23:59, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Have you corrected the image issues raised by Awadewit? If so, considering there were no specific opposes, I'm fine with you bringing it back to FAC as soon as you're ready. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:08, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I had responded to the two images that have not been struck out. I think Awadewit just hasn't looked at my responses yet to strike them.

• File:Denton County Flag.jpg - I requested SVG conversion but a graphics person there said it doesn't seem necessary for a fair-use image.
• File:Denton Arts and Jazz - Celtic Dancers II.jpg - I replaced the description, as Awadeit suggested.

I assume I need to start a new nomination? Thanks, Mahanga 00:31, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you can initiate a new nomination. Be sure to include the diff to this response in your nom, indicating I've given you the go-ahead, or someone may remove the nom as premature. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:34, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the heads-up about the article. I'll check that out. Gingermint (talk) 01:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Music of Minnesota

I reined in the tag-spam a great deal. I agree that I went overboard with the {{fact}} tags. I have no idea why my edits are so sloppy of late; I'm also making huge mistakes on other forums. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 01:24, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm glad you rethought that: thanks for the note! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

For interring the unproductive evidence of my frustration. Regards, DocKino (talk) 04:11, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

We aim to please :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:16, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Training Fifelfoo to be a better and more civil reviewer

Could you please check my approach: here and here and give me an idea if this is a productive way forward? Fifelfoo (talk) 04:38, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I know we're in different time zones, but I'm wiped out after two full days of FAC and FAR, and need some sleep. I'll have a look tomorrow. Thank you for your ongoing efforts !! Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I think the facts regarding the Hungarian revolution are quite clear and there is no point/disruption by Fifelfoo. Sometimes, things regarding national liberation/oppression and whatnot can be overtaken by what one thinks of the subject matter YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (help the Invincibles Featured topic drive) 04:46, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm unclear what you're suggesting, YM? I've never seen or stated there was any disruption there, or elsewhere, from Fifelfoo ??? We are working to make his FAC reviews a bit more decipherable. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

No, I'm saying that the comments made by the folks involved in production of the article that this is a POINT, or Fifelfoo is a Stalinist are irrelevant or unfounded. Teh citations are still flagrantly in multiple formats YellowMonkey (bananabucket) (help the Invincibles Featured topic drive) 05:57, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Oh ... well, Fifelfoo and I were talking about something entirely unrelated to FAR. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry YellowMonkey, there's a general issue with my FAC/FAR reviewing separate to any H56 issues. A sufficient number of editors, including SandyGeorgia, have informed me that I'm using Jargon that's dense, unreadable, and clogging the review process. Also that its undeciferable to the level of incivility to the extent it puts other editors, reviewers, and new FAC candidate presenters off. SandyGeorgia is working with me to improve my quality of reviewing! (But obviously within our time zone constraints) Fifelfoo (talk) 05:01, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Much better, Fifelfoo. Since it doesn't start out as a lengthy oppose, it will be less offputting to new nominators. Some points:

• 1c grade citation issue: I think your shorthand there means that, it's a 2c issue, but if it's not fixed, it's a 1c concern. Is that correct? If so, I'm confused, because supplying author and date on periodicals shouldn't affect 1c ... so perhaps I'm not following your shorthand (and nominators might not be either :)
  • Clarify: I see why date affects 1c in these cases (if you don't have a date, you can't find the article to verify it, but why author? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:26, 9 November 2009 (UTC)
• I can't tell what "closely spaced" and "loosely spaced" mean, or why that's a concern?
• Your example on inconsistent date formatting is fine; that should be enough to get them to fix them all (and there are scripts to do that, so it should never be a big concern. If a FAC gets to the stage that it's promotable, and dates are inconsistent, a script can be run to fix them).
• I'm not sure your feedback on fn50 is correct; WP:MOSCAPS tells us to reduce all caps to lower case.
• On your "Bibliography versus Short cite consistency issues", I'm not sure those changes are necessary. Specific citation styles aren't prescribed, as long as there is consistency. I've rarely seen "Lewis; Scott" formatting at FAC, while the "Lewis & Scott" formatting is quite common.

But overall, a very good approach. Actually, in the case of Lewis, the list of concerns is so short that it probably wasn't necessary to place it on talk; it would have been fine in the main FAC page. I only suggest placing formatting concerns on talk if the list will overwhelm the rest of the review. Perhaps other FAC reviewers will chime in here if I've missed or understood anything here. Thanks again for making such an effort, Fifelfoo! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 10:12, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

November 2009

Misplaced Pages is no place for humour Everything is very, very serious here and we are all terrifically important. This edit introduced unnecessary levels of sexual tension and will distract other editors from their tasks. Please read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:25, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

"Current" article at FAC

Hi Sandy, how's it going? Would it be okay to nominate Already Gone (Kelly Clarkson song) at FAC? It's still in the charts in some countries. Matthewedwards :  Chat  23:30, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Matthew; I'm not sure I understand what you're asking. Are you asking if it meets 1e, stable? That would be best decided by reviewers. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:33, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, basically that. It's still in the charts so some information could still change, although it's only going to be a couple of lines. I'll consider nomming it and see what comments I get back. Thanks! Matthewedwards :  Chat  23:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Motion to reopen ArbCom case "Mattisse"

ArbCom courtesy notice: You have received this notice because you particpated in some way on the Mattisse case or the associated clarification discussion.

A motion has recently been proposed to reopen the ArbCom case concerning Mattisse. ArbCom is inviting editor comment on this proposed motion.

For the Arbitration Committee, Manning (talk) 03:47, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm. The message has been misspelt "Matisse" YellowMonkey (bananabucket!) 08:45, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, yeah, I know. 33 damn individual editor messages and it was only after I'd finished them all that Carch pointed out I'd spelt "Mattisse" wrong. Manning (talk) 11:43, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

FYI - FAC

Hi Sandy. Just so you know, I've left a declaration at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Rhode Island Route 4/archive1 so am recused from closing it. I'll be promoting in a little bit. I'm a little disappointed that there are still so many articles at the bottom that are close to the support line but lack an adequate number of reviews, so I am protesting by not leaving them open another few days. Time permitting, I will try to review a few of these myself before the weekend. Karanacs (talk) 19:15, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Sly & the Family Stone

Re your suggestion to revert to that particular edit: I wasn't sure if that would be acceptable, since so many editors have worked on it since that revision. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 23:52, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

• So should I be bold and revert to that version? There doesn't seem to be any objection after about a week. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:29, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm not sure; I haven't taken the time to see if it's any better. You would need to compare diffs. I also recommend leaving a note that you intend to so do, and wait a few days to see if anyone objects. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
    • I looked over that revision and it looks fine to me; it'd need a couple tweaks to remove some redlinked categories and sound files, but otherwise I don't see any problem with reverting to that diff and then closing the FAR. (Then I can get to filing a FAR on Dime (United States coin).) Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:38, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
      • The FAR wouldn't close immediately, because other reviewers would still need to look over the old version: standards have changed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
• Some of that reunion stuff looks important, and I was able to dig up a source for some of it. Should the unsourced stuff in that section just be snipped outright? Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 20:31, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
  • TPH, I'm following the FAR page; you don't need to also post here to me. Yes, I agree that unsourced additions that were made after mainpage day should be removed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

I'm sorry. :( I hope the best possible outcome for you and him/her. --Moonriddengirl 13:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you, MRG; that is very kind of you. I just hope his passing will be as easy as possible. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:36, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I understand. My current dog is almost ten and in poor health, and sometimes it's the best you can hope for. :( I'll send my good thoughts his way. --Moonriddengirl 13:57, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

If you need me to take over FAC this weekend, just let me know. At our house, the dog is part of the family (he's the stereotypical oldest child who resents his siblings) and in your shoes I'd probably be taking more time off to cry. Best wishes to you, and I hope your sweetie is as comfortable as possible. Karanacs (talk) 14:09, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much, Karanacs. I should be fine by this weekend, but if I strangely disappear and an RIP goes up, you'll all know why. Now, everyone, please don't post on this topic, lest I start crying again, when I've got a lot of catching up to do :) :) :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:15, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

My poor cat, who is not only part of the family but the nucleus of it (you should know this cat), has been ill for a couple weeks. We're still force-feeding her and giving her drugs she seems to hate, and she can't do the things she needs and wants to do. We don't know if she's getting better or not. She was so sick a couple weeks ago, all I wanted her to do was be happy even if that meant she had to leave us. I'm glad she's still here, but now there are more difficult quality of life questions. So...I'm sorry for you Sandy. I know it's rough. --Moni3 (talk) 14:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

I just had to let her go tonight. She was too sick. Sucks balls. --Moni3 (talk) 23:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry to hear about your dog. Animals offer us sped-up versions of our own life cycles. That they display more grace than we do, at all stages, has never ceased to astound me. Living in a family that has more pets than humans, I know that the loss of a family member is deeply felt by all survivors. I wish you strength in this difficult time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 19:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

So sorry Moni3. One of the worst days of my life was the day I had to take my beloved black cat for that last trip to the vet. I was blubbering like a girl, not very manly at all, so I know something of how you feel. --Malleus Fatuorum 00:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Invitation to participate in SecurePoll feedback and workshop

As you participated in the recent Audit Subcommittee election, or in one of two requests for comment that relate to the use of SecurePoll for elections on this project, you are invited to participate in the SecurePoll feedback and workshop. Your comments, suggestions and observations are welcome.

For the Arbitration Committee,
Risker (talk) 08:33, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

I hadn't been paying close attention, and hadn't realized that IP had posted the same link 4 times. I only saw the two times that I reverted. -- Soap /_{Contributions} 16:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Sly

I don't know if you're watching my sandbox or not. Can you think of anything else needs to be fixed before this revision goes "live"? I removed all the "19xx in music" links and did some spot-checks. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • 19:46, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Castle/archive1

To Sandy or any TPS that no what's going on: I've just started the FAC nomination for the castle article, but the page is listing previous FACs related to Castlevanis (presumably because the article title starts the same). How do I get rid of them? I've not listed the nomination yet. Nev1 (talk) 20:20, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

That's a bug. Don't worry - that won't affect the FAC. Karanacs (talk) 20:22, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, I didn't think it would but just wanted to make sure. I've listed the nomination. Nev1 (talk) 20:34, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

ArbCom elections

I was curious if you'd given any thought to these. I'm concerned, based on early results, that the number of qualified candidates will be less than the number of open seats. So I suppose I was curious as to whether you'd thought of encouraging anyone to run, and secondly whether you'd given some thought to a list of general questions as you put forward last year. MastCell  22:27, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Glad to know I wasn't the only one looking at the candidates list and going "Uh, oh." Ealdgyth - Talk 22:30, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

• Support SandyGeorgia for ArbCom. ;/ Ottava Rima (talk) 22:31, 12 November 2009 (UTC)
  • That wasn't the hidden subtext, but yeah, definitely... as a practical matter, I've started drafting something here. I don't think I've necessarily encapsulated the hypothetical very well, but perhaps you see what I'm getting at. In the end, I think it will tell me all I need to know in order to cast my votes. MastCell  22:47, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I've started User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes2009, but haven't decided which way to go with it yet. But the number of questions the candidates already have to answer is daunting: Template:ACEQuestions. MastCell, you know darn well that you should be on ArbCom. The other best candidates I can think of (Tim Vickers, Karanacs and Slp1) are not people I would suggest, since losing them to other areas would be the equivalent of shooting myself in the foot. Again (as with Roger Davies, Rlevse, Risker, Casliber ... other FA regulars). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:55, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

MastCell would make a good Arbitrator. Would he probably vote to ban me? Sure. But still, I can't hold that against him. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 22:58, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Hah. I'd have to take a leave of absence from my job just to answer the slate of candidate questions. I agree that it's out of control - that's why I'm hesitant to add mine on. In a way, I don't like the question-and-answer process. It's begun to seem like a way of making people jump through hoops and do tricks at your bidding, and God forbid you don't answer all 300 questions... "Oppose: Don't like the candidate's superior attitude as evidenced by their failure to respond to all my questions."

I have started to lean in the direction of "specific" questions, or at least questions which pose a clear hypothetical scenario. I've seen too much hand-waving in response to general questions about philosophy, and it's too easy to take a middle-of-the-road crowd-pleasing cop-out. I'd rather see how candidates answer a Kobayashi Maru-type scenario without a clear "right" answer, where they have to take a clear stand on the sorts of issues that they will, after all, be called upon to arbitrate. I think one of the most instructive exercises is to analyze the candidacies of people who were successfully elected, but who turned out to be poor or disastrous Arbs. The point is to identify red flags.

I don't have the time or the effort to commit to being a decent Arbitrator. I'm involved in basically all of the areas I care about already - so I'd have to recuse on any issue that actually mattered to me, and would be left arbitrating disputes between the mdash lobby and the ndash lobby. I don't really want to be the focus of the concerted "outing" that tends to dog pseudonymous Arbs. There's no way I can sort through several hundred mailing-list posts a day. Besides which I suspect I'm probably unelectable. Most importantly: the longer I stay here, the more carefully I have to nurture the part of me that actually derives enjoyment from this place. I think being on ArbCom would crush that part, and I'd end up bitter and out of touch. I mean, more bitter and out of touch than I am already. MastCell  23:10, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, if you are not up for running in the Arbitration Committee election, you can run in the super sekret Awesome Committee election. I'm sure you'd win. Sandy has been a member there for three years running and gets elected each term. ;/ Ottava Rima (talk) 23:13, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

MC, run on the platform that you refuse to answer the questions, and you'll get elected for cojones :) (I never read any of the questions last year; I know the good people, and I don't expect to agree with them on everything.) But of course I read The Fat Man's responses :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:17, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

A friend of mine, when he saw that I had declared that I was going to run for ArbCom again this year, "A) You're nuts, and/or a glutton for punishment. B) Now if you can get MastCell, Alison and GRBerry to run..." I told him that I could be Saint Patrick and kiss the blarney stone and I'd still have an uphill task ahead of me. *grins* SirFozzie (talk) 03:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Sandy, you about gave me a heart attack when I saw my name in your list. There aren't enough shoes/chocolate/books in the world to make me take on that job. On a purely selfish note, I don't think you should run either - I don't want to do FAC by myself! Karanacs (talk) 14:58, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• I take it you still haven't gotten to mine? User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes#Wizardman Granted I'm not sure if I'd want it as a hindsight deal :P Wizardman 03:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I fixed it; better late than never?  :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I'm going to base my vote on whose usernames would sound the least ridiculous when being made fun of by Stephen Colbert. --Moni3 (talk) 03:30, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

It's a good thing I've since learned that it's smart not to run... considering how inventive my school classmates were in grade school, I'm sure Colbert's writers could easily find the cheap laughs in my name :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs 03:32, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I know an editor who can sum up every case in 40 words of less, including findings and remedies, that are spot-on and effective, fair and no-fuss: now that's an arb :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:38, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Sly and the Family Stone

Ug, we've got a huge edit conflict on our hands!!! Ohconfucius 02:16, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• Hope I didn't wipe out anything you did. Ohconfucius 02:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Not to worry-- your work is more important. I'll recheck mine tomorrow (I was only adding periods at the end of citations). Sorry :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

If you have a moment

Mrathel and I were a little bothered when we found out about this. She provided some strong copyediting help so we are not concerned. However, I just wanted to bring it to your attention in case anyone says anything at WT:FAC or whatever. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Ottava; that sock drawer is too big for me to sort at this hour of the night. Is there anything else I need to know? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:15, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Nothing, just a heads up. People are going through her articles and G5ing some of them. I just wanted to make sure you were warned in case someone wanted to zealfully go after any connection. Ottava Rima (talk) 04:19, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, if anyone is going to go after a connection, I hope they'll do it zealfully :) With that list, they'll need a lot of time and energy. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

TFA requests

Ahh, I was hoping to slightly cheat the system to prevent the November 22 request from being dropped. But the rules are the rules.  :) I am hoping you can restore that nomination once William III runs. Thanks! Resolute 05:28, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

The bigger problem there is the two sports articles. By leaving six on the page, the problem doesn't get solved. By keeping five, people will have to decide which sports article to oppose, so it can be removed, then the other article can come back. That's how it works :) If we leave six on the page, we have two back-to-back sports articles; people need to "vote". If they vote one of them off the island, then the removed article can come back. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Sly and the Family Stone 2

Alternate text is grossly missing. That is needed immediately. File:Sly-autumnrecords.jpg should be positioned right per MOS:IMAGES as left profile images are kept at right. Book references need {{harvnb}} Harvard citation template. Most of these album covers don't have a fair-use for usage on this article and fails WP:NFCC#8. These are all I could find at a basic glance. --Legolas 05:33, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Um :) Alt text is a new requirement; older FAs don't have it. IF someone can add it great: I can't :) Harvard citation templates are never required; I'm wondering where you got that idea? Thanks for letting me know it needs an image review; I'll ask one of the image reviewers to look in. I was hoping some of you music people could help locate a source to replace the one non-reliable source? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:37, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

As long as I get a list of the "dubious" sources, I'd be happy to surf proquest for reliable ones. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:39, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Bookkeeper; so far, I've only located one, and I've tagged it, so you can see that text in the article. I've also asked Ealdgyth to run through, but if you see anything strange before you get there, please pop a note on the FAR page. Thanks ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:40, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, I just saw that. Ealdgyth is very good with checking sources. If he finds more unreliable ones, I'll change them as he finds them. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:44, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks so much. I've pinged Fuchs to see if he'll do an image check. Can anyone write alt text? I'm dismal at it. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:45, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I can give it a shot, alt text is also a new concept to me. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 05:48, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) Ealdgyth's a she. See Ealdgyth. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry Ealdgyth! As a raging feminist you'd think I would have stopped using androcentric language by now. :) Sandy! I just remembered my extensive use of Proquest is useless for this article since it only has archives dating back to 1982. There might be some useful info on google books, but other than that I won't be much help. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 11:22, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

No worries, it happens all the time .. it's the "th" ending on the name, I think. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:43, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Midshipman FAC

Would you mind looking over Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Midshipman/archive2? Here's the situation with the alleged copyright problems

• I fixed the two instances specified.
• I reviewed most of the article manually yesterday and found one more problem with a dictionary definition from the OED which I deleted.
• The editor (LingNut) is not responding to my request for specific violations
• The article isn't tagged with any of the copyright problem templates
• He's not satisfied unless I tell you to close the FAC

I'll leave the details of either closing or leaving this FAC open to you. If you do close it, let me know what you want me to do before re-nominating. Thanks! Kirk (talk) 14:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

When plagiarism or copyvio problems are found, they often run deeper than meets the eye (see Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches) and can be hard to fix during the course of a FAC. Ling.nut's resistance to engaging further may be because he found enough that he feels it would be an unfair burden on reviewers to have to check every single sentence, so he may be suggesting withdrawing so you can carefully review and rewrite the entire article, with the Dispatch and WP:COPYVIO in mind. Re-wording isn't always enough to avoid plagiarism, and the article may need a substantial rewrite. It's a huge burden on reviewers to have to analyze sentence by sentence to identify plagiarism, and withdrawal is a better option in this case. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Kirk, I ran into this problem with Jackie Robinson, where plagiarism introduced by various editors over the years was not identified as such until the article was at FAC. It's unfortunate, and can happen to the most well-intentioned nominators, but it one of the handful of issues that will (rightfully and inevitably) sink a FAC nomination. A full (100%) review of article text against source text is in order, to ensure that no inadvertent plagiarism remains. I would suggest withdrawing the nomination of your own volition, both as a clear acknowledgement of the seriousness of the concern and to avoid taking up reviewers' time until the concern is fully resolved. With all due respect to your efforts already, an 80% review is just not sufficient in this situation. Following the completion of your review, the article could be renominated immediately. Withdrawal could be initiated by a post here or on the FAC. Maralia (talk) 19:13, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I put the notice out there for withdrawl, thanks guys. Kirk (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I have archived it; the bot should complete the archiving tomorrow night. FWIW, I am doing a little cleanup work (copyediting etc) on the article. Maralia (talk) 20:11, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

As a separate note, I saw your (Kirk's) question to Ling.Nut about tools to identify plagiarism, as well as Ling.Nut's dismissive (but understandable) response. There are, of course, tools available to assist in the detection of plagiarism (see our article on plagiarism detection). The most robust and full-featured are generally commercial software, but there are a few free options which I can't vouch for, but which may be worth checking out. The simplest plagiarism-detection algorithms can be implemented by anyone with a rudimentary computer-science background, but more sophisticated (and accurate) algorithms are typically commercial, at least the domain of people with formal training in computer parsing of natural languages. In the end, these are just assists - there is no substitute for hand-checking by an alert human being - but they can help sort and prioritize when scanning large documents. I wonder if it's worth formally looking into some of the freely available plagiarism-detection software on behalf of Misplaced Pages, or on behalf of people active at FA? As a separate question, perhaps it's worth approaching the Foundation about investing in commercial plagiarism-detection software, with the goal of keeping the project more plagiarism-free? MastCell  19:31, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• If you have some tools to suggest, that would be helpful. Kirk (talk) 20:02, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Of course all these only help with plagiarism from online stuff, & presumably only that directly accessible by a Google search, ie not not in pdfs & dynamic databases etc available online. Johnbod (talk) 11:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Wikichecker

I was posting to Karanacs page on a completely unrelated topic and saw you discussing an analysis of Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates. Not sure if you are still interested, but here's a link you might find useful: Wikichecker. The page takes about a minute to load. Cheers Manning (talk) 23:52, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Manning: yes, I have that tool, but in this particular case, I was looking only a particular time period when the FAC talk page was troubled. I'm not sure the checker can identify specific time periods, can it? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:55, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

No I don't think so. I build high volume data analysis systems for a living and I'm actually building something like that for myself to use for Arb stuff. When it's finished I'll let you know. Unfortunately I have *no* idea how to build web interfaces for such things, so when I'm done it will be only useful to me and to people who know I have it. Manning (talk) 00:04, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Long FAC

Regarding your comment on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Cologne War/archive1 on the length of the page, would it be a good idea to move long lines of resolved comments (like mine there) to the talk page? Ucucha 02:59, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, you can do that with your own comments if you like, as long as you leave a link to Misplaced Pages talk:Featured article candidates/Cologne War/archive1 on the main FAC page, where you delete your commentary, so others can get to it. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:05, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, that was what I intended to do. It's been moved now. Ucucha 03:10, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

No Line on the Horizon FAC

I have to ask; why did you close the FAC nomination for No Line on the Horizon? Every issue that was brought up by the reviewers was addressed almost immediately, and they all responded after I left messages on their talk pages requesting them to check if their concerns had been properly rectified. Granted there were no supports on the nomination, but neither were there any opposes. I do not think it is fair or right to close a nomination when every response save one regarded a technical issue, and the single oppose was struck after I responded to the concern. All actionable objections were resolved, sufficient information was provided on the FAC criteria, and while it is true there was no consensus for promotion, neither was there any indication that the article should not be promoted. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 04:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

MelicansMatkin, it is very frustrating when that happens, so I understand how you feel. However, the FAC instructions say that "a nomination will be removed from the list and archived if, in the judgment of the director or his delegate ... insufficient information has been provided by reviewers to judge whether the criteria have been met." (see also the edit intro on this talk page) While the reviewers may not have been opposing, that doesn't necessarily mean that they believe the article met the criteria. Also, out of the four substantial reviews, three focused on very narrow issues: source reliability and formatting; technical details; and media. The only thing you can do is just re-submit in a week or two and agressively recruit music editors to review your FAC (there's a Signpost Dispatch about this, but I can never remember which one it is) when you start again. Good luck. Dabomb87 (talk) 14:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, Dabomb87; you might be referrng to Misplaced Pages:Misplaced Pages Signpost/2008-03-17/Dispatches? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:12, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, that's the one. Dabomb87 (talk) 16:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Alright, cheers; it's just frustrating since this is the second time in a row that this has happened. MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 23:16, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Question (admin TPS alert)

Why does Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Brooks–Baxter War/archive3 have no archive1 link? I see archive2 and archive3, but but archive1 is simply a redirect. How did that happen? Dabomb87 (talk) 16:21, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I think it's related to the hyphen to endash change in the first one (Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Brooks-Baxter War/archive1), but to fix all that, I think admin tools are needed. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:25, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Never mind, I fixed it by correcting the redirect to the old hyphen FAC. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:27, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

York Park FAC

I am opposing this FAC on prose grounds - see here. The prose has improved during the FAC but in my view is still way short of criterion 1(a), and there are other minor issues about relevance. My problem is that I shall be away for five days from Sunday, and unable to coax the nominator through the steps required to bring the article up to standard. The article has several supports and mine is the sole oppose. I have offered to do a full copyedit when I get back, if you are happy to leave the nom open until then. Could you take a quick look and see if you think my suggestion is reasonable? Thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 17:50, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Looks good, Brian; I wouldn't worry about five days. If improvements occur, and if another "prose guru" (like Tony) weighs in before you're back, and looks at those issues, could I consider yours resolved in your absence? Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:52, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

If Tony or similar goes through the prose and his/her concern are satisfied, consider mine resolved by proxy. Brianboulton (talk) 01:40, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Hmm, I should probably recheck that FAC. Sandy, btw, I think I resolved Ealgyth's comments. I contacted EyeSerene about going through the prose of Qayen earthquake. ceranthor 18:45, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

How are you doing there with Fowler's oppose? Have you pinged him? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:48, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

He strikes me as the type of person who won't list more concerns, but will just ask for a copyeditor, so I contacted one after resolving those comments. Ottava said not to worry... IDK about that though. :/ ceranthor 18:54, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Qustion

why did you remove lisa simpson from fac if it has been 2 days sceince i nominated it and it had a support and an oppose.--Pedro J. 18:55, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, Scorpion0422, stated he didn't think it was ready. He's written multiple FAs and FAC isn't a place to improve articles to FA status, it's a place to finalize articles for FA. ceranthor 18:58, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Correct. A significant contributor, knowledgeable in FA standards, stated it wasn't ready. FAC is not peer review. This page has helpful tips for bringing an article to standard before a FAC submission. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:00, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Tornado FAR

I believe many of your first round of problems have been resolved. To let us know if they have been, can you strike out the ones which have been resolved to your satisfaction? Thank you for the help you've provided so far. Thegreatdr (talk) 22:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

User:Alamanth is User:Zeraeph

I dont think you will be amused to learn that you have just been conversing with User:Zeraeph here - Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Medicine#Please_help_improve_the_Psychopathy_article. See Misplaced Pages:Sockpuppet_investigations/Zeraeph --Penbat (talk) 19:09, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

FAC stuff

I sent you an email about the above. Mostly, I just wanted to point out that there is some minor work that will happen on the two FACs, so if it seems like there isn't any current work don't be deceived. I've been working directly with my co-noms when they have a chance to make some of the appropriate changes. :) Also, if you are bored. Sorry about the orange bar. You should create a subpage for just my annoying messages so they wont ping you. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 22:42, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

If you plan to say anything on my behalf, I would prefer that you did not. I wanted your advice when trying to craft things before, but I would rather you devote your time to the work you have everywhere else. I have put up enough that if people look, they will see the extent for good and for bad. My actions are my own, and they are the only there here that I can own around here. I have wasted plenty of your time on Wiki, so let me make the first amend to being a timesink by prohibiting you from wasting anymore. :) Go! Enjoy your houseguests. Be happy in real life and I'll be happy. That is enough for me. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 01:54, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I will put up something sometime this week. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:43, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Huh

I understand that no consensus defaults to not promoting, but no one ever said Support or Oppose at Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/2009 Giro d'Italia/archive1, and I thought I was addressing the concerns that were raised in a timely manner. So I'm a bit confused as to why it was closed. Some reviewers indicated that they would be back to review the article further, and now don't have the chance. Is the article just hopelessly never going to be a FA, because I'm at a loss as to what further improvements are necessary. If a nomination is archived, the nominator should take adequate time to work on resolving issues before re-nominating—typically at least a few weeks. I believe I've already done this, so when, if ever, can I re-nominate the article and not have it closed as as premature renomination? I don't really see how it's my fault that no one who had their concerns addressed came back to support promotion. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)} 22:48, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

You've kind of answered your own question there; after concerns and comments have been posted, but no overt oppose or support votes are cast, it's difficult for the delegate to determine whether an article should be left on the FAC backlog or closed as unsuccessful. In no way do I speak for Sandy, but this one had been up for two weeks, and the candidacy page was already pretty long without attracting support; experience tells us that the longer that carries on, the less likely it is that the FAC will draw in fresh reviewers willing to wade through the existing comments and then perform their own thorough review. It's not your fault, but it happens from time to time; I can see how that might be galling. WP:FAC is usually under strain due to a lack of reviewers and, with the page currently 45 nominations long, in this case Sandy seems to have been left with little option but to exercise her discretion and archive the nomination. On your other point, whether there are outstanding issues or not it's usually seen as good practice to wait for two weeks before renominating, as it helps to keep the backlog down to a manageable level. I'm sure that given the high-profile nature of this talk page that when you do bring it back it will be on several reviewers' to-do lists. All the best, and good luck. Steve  23:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I find that very hard to believe (the very last thing you said). Thanks anyway. I doubt I'll ever renominate it. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)} 23:39, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I mean, I just don't get why mine was closed when a great many more that have been open for longer are still open. I'm the only one in my "home" Wikiproject who gives a damn about improving articles beyond Stub-class, so I very much feel personally invested in the nomination and upset by the closure. I get my first GA noms closed because I got mugged, and GA itself is a wait of several months in the first place. Now I have to wait even more time while I don't know what to do to with the article, because I just do. I always thought writing was my biggest strength, guess it's actually a weakness. Alex finds herself awake at night _{(Talk · What keeps her up)}

You are not the only one in this position. Recently, we have had a severe shortage of reviewers recently. Shockingly, more people want to nominate than want to review. Hard to believe, isn't it? :) Anyway, please don't give up! Awadewit (talk) 02:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks Awadewit and Steve. Nosleep, FACs that remain open have Support; Giro was up for several weeks with no support and unresolved sourcing concerns. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:42, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I have been sidetracked trying to review (i.e. clear) some more interesting articles at GAN, as I have a few hovering there. Always a juggling act....Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:53, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(outdent) As a note to those interested, I am happy to review FAC's; Sandy has occasionally dropped me messages, and though it often takes me a few days to two weeks to get to the article in question, I can and will review. I'm most useful in geology and geophysics, or science/engineering in general, but my writin' aint so bad for a scientist so I'm happy to help in general. Note that Thanksgiving in the USA is coming up, so I will be seeing old friends and not be very active on Wiki until the 1st week of December. Awickert (talk) 04:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Arbcom elections 2

Are you doing a voter's guide again this year? (I seem to recall glancing at the embryonic form of one, but I may be crazy), and if so, do you have an objection to it being posted with the others?--Tznkai (talk) 04:29, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I haven't figured out what to do with it yet, since there aren't enough good candidates to figure out how I want to evaluate them. I've started it at User:SandyGeorgia/ArbVotes2009, but it's in no shape to be added to the template yet-- completely unfinished. If we don't get more candidates, I may just have to pick eight and hope for the best :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:32, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You could run. Jehochman 04:37, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice edit summary, Je, but I've heard that line before. <grin> Go knock on these doors. (MastCell likes doors.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:40, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I believe the last time I broached the subject, or a similar one, to MastCell he very graciously told me to go to hell.--Tznkai (talk) 04:47, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Well, keep asking, until he tells you to f off, then :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:49, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You have to pester Bishonen if you want to be told to f off. Jehochman 04:50, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I happen to like the lady and the 'zilla. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:52, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Bishapod is more my speed and intellect. Jehochman 04:56, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

You can pester me if you want to be told to f off. You don't even have to bug me to run for something :D Maralia (talk) 05:03, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Nice move, Tznkai! I want to see how MC's gonna weasel outta that one (it had better be funny :) Now, go bug this one (the hidden gem of Wiki), and then start on Maralia to submit to RFA so we can bug her next year (the other not-so-hidden gem of Wiki). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:06, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Aww. I actually really like Slp1 from our very few but entirely pleasant encounters. I feel like it'd be a little mean if I actually managed to convince her to run into this lion's den.--Tznkai (talk) 05:14, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Undent) In all seriousness, has anyone tried to recruit Slp1 to anything yet?--Tznkai (talk) 16:21, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Not that I'm aware of; I've been too busy to recruit :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:22, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

I've just seen this, and if you'd been here at the time you would have seen a very good view of my tonsils! I am terribly flattered, but please don't think of me for this. I really don't have the time or frankly the desire, to enter, as Tznkai says, the "lions' den". --Slp1 (talk) 17:48, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Other prospective victims:

• Athaenara (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) - Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Athaenara
• EdJohnston (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) - Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/EdJohnston
• Akhilleus (talk · contribs · blocks · protections · deletions · page moves · rights · RfA) - Misplaced Pages:Requests for adminship/Akhilleus

All very solid admins who are not power seekers, Jehochman 05:16, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Karanacs closing

I am bothered that Karanacs feels that it is appropriate to close a FAC that had two and a half supports and no closes simply because a few people made some comments just a few hours before. There wasn't even a chance for those users to get back online and respond. If she is going to do that, then this is a serious problem. That FAC went 13 days without any reviews. That is not my fault, and if she is going to hold that against any FAC then I will ask Raul to revoke her right to review because that is really inappropriate. Ottava Rima (talk) 16:00, 18 November 2009 (UTC)