Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 22:54, 25 January 2008

If you want me to look at an article, please provide the link.
I usually respond on my talk page, so watch the page for my reply.
To leave me a message, click here.

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

You bored?

Can you help me review Introduction to evolution. I like it, but after being pushed by you during a couple of FA (and I mean pushed as in making it much better), I think you can help me out. This article is important, but I have some reservations especially with regards to the quality of citations. Thanks. OrangeMarlin 23:33, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Just to let you know SG is on a wikibreak right now. She might respond when she comes back, but she'll have a lot to deal with then, so please be patient. Geometry guy 23:39, 18 January 2008 (UTC)

Should have read above. I'm old. Bad eyes. Whiny excuse :) OrangeMarlin 00:03, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

I'm not going to be able to get involved in editing that article, but I think this is one of the most surprising comments I've ever seen on Misplaced Pages:

The decision was made to minimize the number of references in the article to make it more accessible. ... --Filll (talk) 16:17, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I haven't had time to look, but I hope that issue has been resolved, and I won't even attempt to understand how citations decrease accessibility. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:56, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for helping out SG. I'm a stickler for proper citations (as I know you are). BTW, I'm so in love with that automatic citation tool, I actually look for articles to clean up!!!!! Thanks so much!!!!! OrangeMarlin 23:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

FAC promotions

If you're feeling up to it, I could really use your help busting the log-jam on FAC. I'll be doing the next round of promotions tomorrow night. Raul654 (talk) 06:02, 19 January 2008 (UTC)

No problem, I hope you are enjoying your holiday. Woody (talk) 21:55, 20 January 2008 (UTC)

We just edit conflicted on FAC promotions. Finish doing the ones you just did, but don't promote any more for the next few hours; in the meantime, I'll resolve the diff. Raul654 (talk) 01:44, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

Raul showed me this comment of yours. I appreciate the support, but I was a little confused, since G-bot checks the FA and FFA counts but doesn't update anything on-wiki. Gimmetrow 23:59, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

I know. Without going into too much detail there, you always catch errors before I do, and the bot doublechecks the numbers, which I track really closely. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:02, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Lead(II) nitrate

Hi Sandy, thanks emphasizing just now that the Lead(II) nitrate is not merely a former FA, but also one which made mainpage in the early WP years. Would you care to comment about the content of the article now, e.g., by adding a Comment or Support to its voting page? I'd appreciate your experienced feedback. Wim van Dorst (talk) 00:24, 22 January 2008 (UTC).

Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Alice in Chains

I got rid of one link, but what in God's green Earth is a connection timeout? —Burningclean  01:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It means that the computer timed out before it located that site; it could be that the site is down, or is dead. One thing you can do is try to locate the old link at http://www.archive.org SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

When I looked at the links, they went to where they were supposed to right away, so I don't know what is wrong with them. Are those bad or just kind of a "whatever" type thing? With four supports (five counting me) and only one official objection (one struck out a support, two struck out objections, so I don't know if those count if they did it would be 6 (or 7) support, 2 object) would it still be promoted to FA? —Burningclean  02:14, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Then it could be a problem with the tool timing out; you can just indicate that you checked those links and they all linked fine, and Raul and I will recognize that when we run through FAC. I haven't had time to read through all the FACs yet, and Raul is going to run through next. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:16, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

that must be what happened. Thank you for your help. —Burningclean  02:27, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Do you know when he will be? I know a bach were promoted yesterday. —Burningclean  02:41, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Raul ran through a batch yesterday to lower the page size; he indicated that he hadn't gotten through everything and that he would run through again tonight, but if he doesn't get to it, I will by tomorrow or the next day. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:43, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. This FAC has been a nightmare, for a while I lost hope for it, now I have hope it sstill can be. Why aren't you listed as a FA director? —Burningclean  03:05, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

U2 FAC...

Hi Sandy. I don't understand your comment on the U2 FAC regarding unresolved external links. here. Sorry if I've missed something really obvious - a dumb question?

There are 3 links in the EL section - is that what you are referring to? My personal preference is just for the official site. thanks --Merbabu (talk) 01:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It doesn't refer only to external links; more importantly, some of the references have problems. Check the external link checker on the FAC page. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:49, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

OK - thanks. Looks like it may have been done, but i will double check. regards --Merbabu (talk) 12:17, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Pitti

Ya, I sometimes get Ceoil and Casliber mixed up because of the C's; thanks for noticing. I don't deserve much credit there. (Except for digging up the research paper.) Marskell (talk) 08:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

It would be nice to have some way to formally list saves, but it's largely a judgement call. Many people have been involved in more than two.

I think Macintosh is good, speaking of which. Marskell (talk) 20:32, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Yay, you're back!

Welcome back! :) Xavexgoem (talk) 20:52, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, X, how's it going? Yes, I'm back; what doesn't kill 'ya makes 'ya stronger. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:34, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Or prolongs the inevitable. Gimmetrow 21:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Don't scare me like that :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:47, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Working with WP:MEDCAB :) Xavexgoem (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hey, glad to hear you're "gainfully employed" on Wiki :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

If I might be so bold, I would like to echo the above 'yay'. Yay! WLU (talk) 21:45, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

WLU, thanks for the nice slinky and oak tree -- among my favorites. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:46, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I had hoped to appeal to your sense of whimsy. I stuck with yellow rather than Ssilver's red hot, beause the sun is yellow. Like the sun, you are warm, illuminating (though I won't give you 'source of all life on earth - there are limits to poetic license unfortunately), and a thermonuclear furnace producing energy that results in work. I estimate your total output at 3.1415926 megajoules - the amount of energy produced by pi(e).

Math jokes. Hilarious! And now I've got to go. Happy editing! WLU (talk) 21:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

I like yellow :-) And math jokes, too. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:15, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Wicked (musical)

Hi. I noticed that Wicked was not promoted to FA. I agree with that result, but I think the article has come a long way, and I wonder if you or Raul could drop a few notes on the article's talk page regarding the issues that you still saw there? Also, I agree with the above: "Yay, you're back!" All the best. -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:13, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Hi, Ss; I never actually had time to take a solid look at that article. Raul did that round of archives, but I see it had garnered no supports in 3 weeks. I only remember that the Fair Use issue wasn't resolved to my satisfaction; I suggest you all get a serious image person to take a look. I heard this weekend that Stephen Schwartz is doing an opera. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:30, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

OK, thanks. I have no idea who good image person would be, though. The only reason that I am working on this article is because it is the muscal theatre project's first important FA project, and it would be nice if it got good comments that might guide us in the future. Best regards, -- Ssilvers (talk) 06:52, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

FAC

After two consectutive days of promotions and archiving, the FAC is still too large. Are you going to do a round tonight? If not, I will. Raul654 (talk) 21:51, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

If you don't mind doing it tonight, I don't feel I've had time to catch up adequately on them. I'm concerned about the number of bad citation links in PlayStation 3; other than that, I'm not yet up on each FAC. I'm still catching up on some of the "bookkeeping" (talk page) work. I've noticed that if I archive a FAC with a few opposes, I get jumped on, while you don't :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:54, 22 January 2008 (UTC)

Golden Film

Thank you for your comment on Misplaced Pages:Featured article candidates/Golden Film. I tried to fix all erroneous links. – Ilse@ 10:22, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

FIFA world Cup

Can you stop with this for a second please, I have consistently formatted all of the dates in the references, just keep conflicting with you. ;) Woody (talk) 17:54, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

That is the dates done. I know it is Tony's pet hate!! ;) Woody (talk) 18:00, 23 January 2008 (UTC)

Kirlston:FAC comments

Dwarf Kirlston, I was just reviewing the Emma Watson FAC, and saw that you had commented in four or five different places. I see that you often oppose, strike, later oppose again, strike, and later oppose again. This makes it very hard for me to keep up with where you stand on an article and how many reviews it has had; if you can keep all of your commentary together in one place, even when you change your mind, it would make my job easier. Thanks, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:06, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

I understand what you say and I will try to do so in the future. - Thanks for the heads up. ---Regarding why I did it: I have previously found it useful to start all over again, both with different objections and with a different attitude, as through I were a completely different reviewer. I thought this might be useful in that specific FAC as my previous oppose turned into a confrontation with my actions being referred to as "POV pushing". In other FAC's my previous objection had been crossed out long time previously. ---I also agree that I should put all my comments together. I think a step towards that would be defusing confrontations before they reach that level.

Thank you for contacting me on my user talk page. I hope you find my contributions to the FA process and to Misplaced Pages "good". I hope also that you will not fear that politeness is the opposite of civility, and will let me know where you believe I could improve.

Sincerely,
Kiyarrllston

Yes, starting over several times doesn't create a problem, but if you can keep it all together, it will help my simple mind :-) Reading through 50+ FACs at a time is harder than it looks. Regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:58, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

It is tough. - I believe you.

Methinks I have seen a glimmer of the difficulty of your job, when I attempted to comment on every FA Candidateship.

Please feel free to use my user talk page to contact me.

Regards,

Kiyarrllston

Mainpage date

Yes, I've been updating the mainpage dates whenever I can. Epbr123 (talk) 08:09, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

RNAi FAR

To be honest I had completely forgotten about it! Not much seems to be happening though. Tim Vickers (talk) 22:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

What do I need?!

(Goodness, you're lovely for even asking)

I need a section that describes human interactions, mythology, culture, etc. I think it will have to be Spanish and Portuguese based, if it's to exist at all on .en. I have some interesting descriptions from Duplaix (the main source) on interactions with Native Americans, but nothing that can create a full section. Can you find anything with your Spanish?

This raises an interesting question: if a particular subject area can only be satisfied in another language, should we hold it against the English article? Giant Otter is complete. It's at least as good as Jaguar and Cougar were, when I brought them to FAC. But it lacks that humans/mythology/culture section. And I don't think I can provide one without Latin American googling skills. It's raised an interesting puzzle in my mind: this is only an English FA, if we have a Spanish and Portuguese speaker? Hm.

(All of this said, Clayoquot is raising the bar on animal articles with Sea Otter. Truly excellent. The Giant Otter is comparatively under-studied, though I'd like the article to be as good.) Marskell (talk) 22:17, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Working on it, while listening to TimVickers podcast. Gathering what I can find: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:21, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Remember to search on Diane McTurk: her e-mail address, she may have some folklore: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:27, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sort through this: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:34, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Confirmation on other names, including nutria and perro de agua: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:36, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Sort through these: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:40, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

A children's book: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:55, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Biblio on giant otters and people:

In captivity: Bolivian freshwater protected area: Peruvian preserve: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:05, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Locate? DIANA MARCELA VELASCO. "VALORACION BIOLOGICA Y CULTURAL DE LA NUTRIA GIGANTE (PTERONURA BRASILIENSIS) EN EL AREA DE LA INFLUENCIA DE PUERTO CARRERÑO, VICHADA, COLOMBIA (RIOS ORINOCO, BITA, CAÑOS JURIEPE Y NEGRO)". 2005. Curso (ECOLOGIA) - Facultad de Estudios Ambientales y Rurales SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:20, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Loch ness monster: SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:23, 24 January 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the load of checking. Lontra I believe is the Portugese and Nutria the Spanish. Of those provided, three summative sentences on the Colombia field reports would be great. ("to calm people who have some problem with a fish" would need unpacking :). You might add one sentence from the BBC in Peru and I can add something from Duplaix and we'll have a section. And some of the links to McTurk can be used. The Naming section can be done after the Humans section. Thanks! Marskell (talk) 08:49, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Oh, and where's this podcast? Marskell (talk) 08:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I had seen Otterjoy before but skipped it, as I wasn't sure if it met RS. I see it's maintained by an academic. If she's been published in the Specialist Group Bulletin, I think her website is acceptable. Marskell (talk) 09:12, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Rather than exhaustively listing everything in the other two languages, I created a short naming section with a ref I already had from the UN: Giant_Otter#Naming. Marskell (talk) 13:39, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Clarification request

Hi Sandy, glad to see your back. By now I assume that you have noticed that the refiled FAC for USS Illinois (BB-65) was succsessfull, and that I personally filed the afd now running on the page. In the spirit of consensus could I bug you to expand on your keep comment here? Thanks. TomStar81 (Talk) 07:46, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Cont'd

Don't hesitate to simply start an Interactions with humans section. As I say, even four or five sentences would be helpful. Cheers, Marskell (talk) 15:58, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

On a different subject, how do you feel about James T. Aubrey, Jr.? Marskell (talk) 18:35, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll look later; trying to get through FAC. We need more reviewers. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:47, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

F-4 Phantom II - question about references

On your latest comments in the FARC discussion, you have commented on the use of "blue link unformatted citations to personal websites" (and mentioned Joe Baugher's Phantom website. I have commented on the FARC page on the fitness for purpose of tis website - re the formatting of the reference, what would count as the publisher for such a website? Would something like:

Baugher, Joe. McDonnell F-4K Phantom FG.Mk.1 McDonnell F-4 Phantom II Retreived 25 January 2008

be appropriate?Nigel Ish (talk) 18:51, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll do a couple of sample edits as soon as I get a free moment. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:53, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I know, Sandy, that a page can seem unencouraging. But you know the tightrope that needs to be walked at FAR. FAR closures are, sometimes, much harder than those at FAC. Nigel is still here, commenting. I want to be fair, even if it's extra generous. Can we do those publishers based on the example edits?

(Same thing happening at Macintosh, incidentally.) Marskell (talk) 20:36, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

It will take me hours to clean up the citations: every one of them needs to be rewritten, and I don't know what to do about all the non-reliable sources. It's hard to know where to start. This Joe Baugher fellow is not a reliable source, nor is vectorsite.net, and they are cited extensively, along with other personal, hobby sites. <sigh> SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:40, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

Then don't fix them. I'll wait another week; if nobody else starts to fix them, then it will be removed. Marskell (talk) 20:57, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I'll chip away at them as I can, but it's a full-time effort. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:59, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

I've started a discussion on the use of sites like vectorsite and Joe Baugher's site here. You may want to comment.Nigel Ish (talk) 21:02, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

One thing worth coming back for

		The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
		For protecting Misplaced Pages by proving you really are SandyGeorgia by having more class and grace than anyone should ever ask of anyone else. Sometimes, when bad things happen to good people, the good people show who's who, and everyone wins. KP Botany (talk) 22:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)

PS You're still wrong about the Lassen article. Geologists study not only the sedimentary record, but the absence of the record--it's every bit as important to discuss where the stratigraphic column goes absent, as it is to describe the sediments and their history. Being wrong in this instance or any other doesn't subtract from your immense contribution to quality on Misplaced Pages. Thanks for showing everyone how it could work and how it should work if only you weren't the only SandyGeorgia. KP Botany (talk) 22:54, 25 January 2008 (UTC)