Hey Cavie, Feline1 and I can not seem to agree but he only seems to argue with one thing with my new intro for the Trans-Europe Express article. Could you take a look at it again? I think everything else I've cleared up since your review. Thanks for sticking it out with us so long! Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:55, 12 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Andrzejbanas, no problems about waiting just glad we're a bit nearer. I'm currently off work sick with a horrible bout of flu but I'll look at the article in the next few days once my head feels a bit less like cotton wool! Cavie78 (talk) 14:05, 13 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for helping out the review. That felt quite exhausting. If any more Kraftwerk information comes forward, I'll try to add more to boost it to a GA level. Cheers! Great work again with the Super Furry Animals articles. What do you plan to do after finish your work on the Super Furries? Andrzejbanas (talk) 20:05, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, glad it's finally passed! When I've done with the Furries I'm going to work my way through some classic albums that aren't covered very well on Wikipedia... although I'm probably still a few years away from that yet! Cavie78 (talk) 21:28, 18 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unreferenced BLPs
Hello Cavie78! Thank you for your contributions. I am a bot alerting you that 3 of the articles that you created are tagged as Unreferenced Biographies of Living Persons. The biographies of living persons policy requires that all personal or potentially controversial information be sourced. In addition, to ensure verifiability, all biographies should be based on reliable sources. If you were to bring these articles up to standards, it would greatly help us with the current 8 article backlog. Once the articles are adequately referenced, please remove the {{unreferencedBLP}} tag. Here is the list:
I found out an issue of Uncut (from last year, I believe) a friend gave me has one of those discography overview pieces on Super Furry Animals, where Gruff Rhys gives his commentary on the lot of them. Do you have that article, or do you need me to source from it? WesleyDodds (talk) 12:02, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Wesley, I've got that issue thanks, it's kinda what started me off working on the album articles! Unfortunately it doesn't include Dark Days/Light Years though and I'm struggling to find the usual "track by track" guide the band tend to give so if you come across anything please let me know. Cavie78 (talk) 12:05, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
By the way, didn't you say a while ago you were interested in working on the Stone Roses' debut? If so, let me know. I've been meaning to start another project, but I don't have to drive to do it alone. WesleyDodds (talk) 12:06, 31 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
On hold. Very pleasing article. A joy to read. Some quibbles regarding amount of quotation used, and closer citing of quotes, and the long listing of session musicians. Otherwise it's fine. Give me a ping when you've done the quibbles, or if you wish to dispute my assessment. Regards SilkTork *YES!15:41, 30 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]
. I still have reservations about the long list of session musicians, but not enough to fail the article. The DVD Infobox is not helpful, so I have removed it. If you decide to later replace it as you personally prefer it, that is your choice, but I see no guidelines to support including it, and its presence was distracting from an otherwise very fine article. I think you are able to research and present material in such a way that you should be looking at taking articles, such as this one, up to FA. Ask for a Peer Review on this article and see what people say needs to be done before submitting it to FA.
Hiya, I'm back on WP. Thanks for your kind offer to assist with the potential inclusion of an audio sample in Kala (album). What do I need to do? Do I need to get hold of some specific software....? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 22:10, 7 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm happy to create the sample(s) for you if you let me know the specific portions of songs that you want. To do it yourself you need some music editing software that will allow you to save as ogg vorbis files. I think there's a freeware program around but I can't remember the name of it for the life of me. Cavie78 (talk) 16:59, 8 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the first 20 seconds of the song "Bird Flu" would be perfect (20 secs is 10% of the track, which I believe is permissible) - should I send you an MP3 of it.......? -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:13, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added the clip to the Composition and recording section but you might want to move it (think it fits better in Music and lyrics but that section already has an image and quote box. I started the clip about 10 seconds into the song so it includes some of M.I.A.'s singing as well as the drum beat which I think is better than it starting from the very start, hope that's ok. Anymore help with song clips let me know and good work with the article. Cavie78 (talk) 22:31, 9 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
WikiProject Good Articles will be running a GAN backlog elimination drive for the entire month of April. The goal of this drive is to bring the number of outstanding Good Article nominations down to below 200. 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. Hope we can see you in April.
Hello there. Thanks for your review of the JT. It's very thorough, and you're promising more which is fantastic. Whether it passes or fails GAN is less important than opportunity for outside eyes, which are always helpful rather than the small handful of U2 regulars. I've put The Unforgettable Fire up for a peer review - would be great if you accepted the challenge as you did for JT. cheers --Merbabu (talk) 14:02, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, will have a look. Sorry that I haven't finished my GA review of Joshua Tree - I've been ill for the past few days. Cavie78 (talk) 09:19, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The Joshua Tree GAN
Most of the points seem to have been addressed. There are a few more left which might take a few more days. What do you think overall now? And, when does the “on-hold” expire? Cheers --Merbabu (talk) 23:06, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Will have a look tomorrow - seems to be progressing well. I'm more bothered about getting the article to GA full stop rather than placing time limits so don't worry about the 'on hold' thing. Cavie78 (talk) 23:10, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just letting you know, I fixed the errors to the best of my ablity and left comments on the talk page. Thanks for your help! Candyo32 (talk) 19:45, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I've had another look through and there are some minor points outstanding that need to be dealt with but nothing that can't be fixed pretty quickly. Good work with the article to this point! Cavie78 (talk) 10:35, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far.
We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns.
Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May
On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive.
661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold.
Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days.
63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success.
The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less).
For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. monosock18:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Why am I getting this message? Mono's delivery method is random, so you probably showed up somewhere Mono went. :)
Note
When you start new threads on talk pages, please add the new section to the bottom of the talk page, not the top. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:32, 22 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
When reviewing, edits should be accepted if they are not obvious vandalism or BLP violations, and not clearly problematic in light of the reason given for protection (see Wikipedia:Reviewing process). More detailed documentation and guidelines can be found here.
Hi Wes, how's it going? I've been really busy with real world stuff so haven't been too active on Wiki myself recently. Cavie78 (talk) 13:01, 25 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Covers in discographies
Per long standing practice and WP:NFC, the use of covers in discographies is not supported. I understand these come from articles that were merged into a rollup article. It doesn't matter. This debate has been repeated many times over the last few years with the result that every time the covers remain off of the discography article in question. Nevertheless, if you insist that we debate it again you may wish to raise it at WT:NFC. --Hammersoft (talk) 12:21, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Surely the point of not allowing covers in discographies is to discourage galleries? Discographies are usually just lists which don't provide any critical commentary but this article is different as many of the singles have reasonably detailed info and this could be expanded. Cavie78 (talk) 13:07, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If every time a subject comes up and the same result happens, eventually minds are made up on a subject. That's quite true. There's nothing different about this article that hasn't been debated before. I was hoping to educate you on that, not get into a meta debate on whether it's appropriate to debate this issue. --Hammersoft (talk) 14:30, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
