Hello, Boissière! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! Dabomb87 (talk) 22:43, 5 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have sorted it as you suggested. What do you think about it now? Any more suggestions for improvement will be welcome. ≈ Chamaltalk05:57, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh I recently moved one of the categories that template is working off but forgot to update the code in the template itself. My bad. Fixed now. Thanks for pointing it out - rst20xx (talk) 19:22, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for your interest. My thinking behind it is that it seems to me that FLs seem to gradually drift away from the ideals due to factors such as changing standards, link rot, dodgy updates etc., and if each FL had an informal assessment once a year then it would hopefully mean that fewer would end up in FLRC. For my initial attempt I have chosen the anniversary month of the list's promotion hence my spring clean page containing all FLs promoted in August. However I must say that I am finding it quite difficult to assign a value to my chosen categories for each list and I might consider revising my methodology to have a set of common faults (using the Wikipedia:Featured lists/Cleanup listing page - which I hadn't seen before - to help me in compiling the set) and assessing each list against that set. Even so my initial assessments do seem to indicate, as feared, that the older FLs need more work. However it does seem to me that a lot of the faults could be fixed by non-experts. Boissière (talk) 19:03, 6 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Sorry about that, I only realised what I had done when logging in just now. That'll teach me to create pages at 11 o'clock at night. Boissière (talk) 11:16, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so you just got one. Doesn't mean I don't appreciate this. :D If you pile up enough, the Barnstars stop coming (though they may get creative first), but my gratitude does not go away. We need all the help we can get in this area, and yours is very much appreciated. --Moonriddengirl(talk)12:24, 15 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello Boissière, and thanks for patrolling new pages! I am just letting you know that I deleted 2011–12 NHL Northwest Division standings, a page you tagged for speedy deletion, under a different criterion from the one you provided. The speedy deletion criteria are extremely narrow and specific, and the process is more effective if the correct criterion is used. You may wish to review the Criteria for Speedy Deletion before tagging further pages. Thank you. Danger (talk) 15:17, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just so you know, what to tag that one (I used A10 - a recently created copy of existing material) was definitely non-obvious and I think that criterion is fairly new anyway. So no harm, no foul, but I did want to let you know. Cheers, Danger (talk) 15:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I must admit I did consider A10 but then I saw that G6 has the sentence "This also includes pages unambiguously created in error and/or in the incorrect namespace" which seemed to me to fit the bill. I expect one could argue either way. Boissière (talk) 21:41, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deletion of Toluca Lake residents page
Rather than nuking the entire list of famous residents of this entertainment enclave, can you tell me how the category page for famous residents of Toluca Lake should have been constructed? The Toluca Lake article page editors said the list needed to be a Category page, so we did that, and then you deleted the entry.
Thanks for correcting the category on the Belmez article. I must have read that thing through about 20 times since I wrote the original version, but I never spotted that mistake. Tigerboy1966 15:57, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]
A-ha. I had a feeling that maybe someone else had come across that page as a lot of the red-linked cats on it were coming up empty (more than just through 'natural' corrections by editors). I have just updated the page as a result of the latest enwiki dump by the way (250 fewer entries than the previous month).
I wouldn't object so it being made more public. As implied above I use the database dumps to do this - in this case using the dump of the category table (not too large fortunately) to obtain the names of all the categories. The same info could obviously be obtained with a straight database query. One thing that has stopped me is that I really need a way to eliminate categories that genuinely have similar names (eg. Category:Hatay Province and Category:Ha Tay Province). Boissière (talk) 14:00, 6 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I sorted the the files in Category:File at CCI into subcategories so that it is easier to see which files are marked as still open. I have not checked if some files are missing or if some files have been found ok. It would however be good if we found a good and easy way to do that. --MGA73 (talk) 09:37, 5 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I have to confess that I have not done anything for a while. In particular for the image parts of those twi CCIs it really needs someone to "check my working". I see that you have done so for some of the images that I was unsure about and that is at least some progress. I have also seen your comments on Wikipedia Talk:Contributor copyright investigations and may weigh in there with some thoughts on how we could better handle the image-based CCIs (perhaps with some sort of initial triage). Boissière (talk) 14:36, 8 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Yes we should find a way to handle this. Perhaps one checks and another one reviews and then if they agree case is closed.
Hello. You are invited to join Darius Dhlomo Drive, a project which aims to cleanup and resolve one of the oldest copyright investigations on the sire. We hope that you will join and help to clean what's left of the copyright violations. You are getting this invitation because you have helped out previously, and I am inviting you back to hopefully wrap this up. Wizardman01:41, 14 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
