|
User talk:Wadewitz/Archive 35
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Flag of SingaporeI addressed your concerns, just to let you know. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 20:14, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
I decided to remove the problem images, since I cannot obtain official construction sheets. This MINDEF lists what colors are used on what flag, but I am not certain about exact shades and things like that. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:45, 11 January 2009 (UTC)
Request for Copy EditHello! I'd like to thank you for the time you have taken to comment on the Article Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War II). I will certainly respond to each on the FAC review page. I had requested a copy edit from an independent editor on Milhist Copy Edit. Yet there are comments from several reviewers on the prose. So Can I politely ask for a Copy Edit on this article for prose ? I am making this request only because you have mentioned on your page that you may take specific Copy-Edit Requests. Please let me know if that's not the case. I'd really appreciate if you could spare the time. Thanks once again. Perseus71 (talk) 17:53, 7 January 2009 (UTC) The Beautiful Singing of Caged BirdsHey there, A. Long time no talk. Hope you're well. I've been working with Figureskatingfan on the article for I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. (I think you were contacted about it awhile back.) We're getting close to FACland, I think, and we'd be honored to have your thoughts on it. The structure and research are really solid, so the main things now are checking for consistency (especially with names, which I can explain later) and prose refinement. If you're able, just lemme know and we'll get to it. Cheers! Scartol • Tok 01:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)
FrankensteinHi there. I am back on WP but I'm no longer sure I can devote the time to working on Frankenstein. It sure would be nice to get done, though. --Laser brain (talk) 19:40, 12 January 2009 (UTC)
Jack KempSandy wants an image review at the Jack Kemp FAC. Can you take a look please?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:59, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Mea maxima culpaI'm so sorry to make a stupid error after all the careful work you've put in. I've tried to fix it, but not sure if I've got it right. Let me know, and if necessary I'll withdraw from FAC for a while to fix this jimfbleak (talk) 08:07, 13 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 10, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 20:00, 11 January 2009 (UTC)§hepBot (Disable) 18:47, 13 January 2009 (UTC) BF and CBHey there, A. I know you're MegaBusy, but I've done some work (and replied) pursuant to your image concerns at the Barton Fink FAC. When you have a minute, you can have a look. Also, do you think you'll have some time at any point to look at Caged Bird? (If not, we understand; we'll drag someone else in. But it would be best to have the best.) Cheers! Scartol • Tok 17:04, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Image checkI don't THINK I already asked you this, but could you double check the images on Nigel (Bishop of Ely)? I think he's just about ready for FAC. If I already asked, whap me with a trout... Ealdgyth - Talk 23:27, 14 January 2009 (UTC)
Possibly the smallest copyedit request you'll ever get.Hey Awadewit, after a long discussion at Talk:Noah's Ark a new introduction is being worked on. For now the focus is on the first couple of sentences, but I'd like to get a pro copyeditor to take a quick look at just the first sentence. Is this
ok? I'm hopeless at English, but I get the feeling the comma is in the wrong place. If you need to get a feel for what will (likely) come after that sentence, you can check the very last section of the talk page I mentioned above. Cheers, Ben (talk) 05:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I am not certain over the purpose of use for this image (for Super Bowl XXXVIII halftime show controversy). It seems to be primarily a description of the picture with a claim to notability ("The incident is of notability as the most searched for news item in internet history." does not appear in the Super Bowl article as well)... I understand that this image is to identify the incident, but am curious why should it be this particular media image, why not others like the one taken at the instant Jackson's breast was exposed with the nipple shield (this), or the one directly after her exposure (this or this) in which the reactions seems more relevant to the moment? Would that not be of more direct relevance? I would like to hear your opinion on this rationale and any suggestions to improve it. Jappalang (talk) 22:10, 15 January 2009 (UTC)
Prose reviewIt seems that most of your review work is now images-related, a noble, necssary and usually thankless task. Are you doing general reviewing at all? The reason I ask is that I have just sent Mozart in Italy to peer review. It is an article that is crying out for the sort of review you gave a few months ago to its companion-piece Mozart family Grand Tour. If it is possible for you to find time to look at this, it would be much appreciated (the images probably need checking out, too). Brianboulton (talk) 15:07, 16 January 2009 (UTC)
Someone told me to contact you for Image issues. KensplanetTC 07:52, 17 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 17, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 21:12, 17 January 2009 (UTC) Delievered by SoxBot II (talk) at 23:16, 17 January 2009 (UTC) Images - DreadnoughtHi Awadewit, would you mind checking over the images on Dreadnought (currently on an A-class review and will soon be coming to FAC). I'm pretty confident that all the images are OK in copyright terms, but I'm not sure all of them have the right information on their images pages, and don't really understand what they need. Many thanks, The Land (talk) 19:11, 18 January 2009 (UTC)
Image questionI was thinking of bringing back this image now that a blockquote has been removed. The original date is unknown, but would the fact that it is attributed to the Flemish school be sufficient to use PD-old? Many thanks, by the way, with your copyedit. I just wish I can write better the *first* time. I guess I have to keep practising. --RelHistBuff (talk) 15:18, 19 January 2009 (UTC)
review of Jesuit Missions of the ChiquitosHi Awadewit, I noticed your name on Wikipedia:Peer_review/volunteers#History. Would you mind to have a look over the history part (or more) of Jesuit Missions of the Chiquitos and let me know what you think. I am trying to get it up to good article quality but would need some feedback. cheers! bamse (talk) 22:29, 20 January 2009 (UTC)
Awadewit, thanks for your recent copyedit of this article, I really appreciate it. Scartol has also worked on it with me. It's almost time to submit it for FAC; my goal is for it to pass in time for the 40th anniversary of the publication of the book, which is this year. So we're on track, thanks to you guys' help. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 23:14, 22 January 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, January 24, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 03:08, 25 January 2009 (UTC) Delivered by 03:32, 25 January 2009 (UTC) at §hepBot (Disable) Thanks for the feedback...on this. I believe all of your concerns have been addressed. If there is anything we missed, please let us know! Thanks! — BQZip01 — talk 19:23, 25 January 2009 (UTC)
Image checkHey, I know you're prolly busy with FACs and other stuff and whatnot, but before I take Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country to FAC after we've eliminated the backlog I'd like your opinion on the images. If you could review them and leave a note on the talk page, that would be great; if you can't I understand. Thanks, --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 00:58, 26 January 2009 (UTC)
SwimmingHi Awadewit, I'd be pleased if you gave it another look. I don't speak for Raul or JNW but we seem to be slowing down over there, I know that I have. Thanks..Modernist (talk) 04:22, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
Recordings of episodes of "Flywheel"Hi Awadewit. The three known recordings of Flywheel, Shyster, and Flywheel, a five-minute excerpt of Episode 24, a fifteen-minute recording of Episode 25, and a full 30 minute Episode 26. Are these the ones you're referring to are at the Marx Brother website in Real Audio format. I simply haven't gotten around to streaming and recording them yet. Also, http://www.archive.org/details/otr_flywheelshysterflywheel has the BBC versions, but as these are from 1991, I am unsure if they are PD or not. The material is PD, as the copyrights were never renewed, but the recordings are probably still owned by the BBC. If that is true, I just can't understand why they allow them at The Internet Archive. Do you think they might be PD as well? Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 06:31, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
The Swimming HoleWell done; I enjoyed reading it! Tony (talk) 14:44, 27 January 2009 (UTC) RequestCould you do me a favor and possible "borrow" and upload the frontispieces and title pages to Henry Fielding's plays (from the Eighteenth Century website, you know which one :) )? The originals of those were just a -tad- out of my price range as were some other editions before the 19th century, so all I have are facsimiles of later editions for "educational" use. :) This lists the ones that I am aiming for right now. If you don't have the time, I will go and fork over the money to renew my access. :) Ottava Rima (talk) 22:15, 27 January 2009 (UTC)
FAC image questionI had some problems updating images in the 2008 ACC Championship Game FAC. The images are uploaded both on Wikipedia and on Wikimedia Commons under the same name ... how do I get the links on the page to connect to the Wikimedia images rather than the Wikipedia ones? JKBrooks85 (talk) 01:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Request regarding Napoleon articleHi Awadewit, i noticed you've done a massive amount of good work including on biographies in the Napoleonic period. I'm trying to learn from past experiences and work more collaboratively, including discussion with editors working in this area. i've worked the article up since last June including more modern citations, better presentation and put it through peer review last September. Appreciate you're busy, but grateful for any suggestions on improvement Talk:Napoleon_I_of_France#What_do_we_have_to_do_to_get_this_to_featured_level.3F. Tom B (talk) 18:49, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
On the literary treatment of spirits...Dear Awadewit, I had a hankering to spruce up ghost in the manner of vampire, which occupied me for much of 2007. One thing I would really appreciate is some commentary of the use of ghosts in literature (eg in Shakespeare, Dickens, Wilde, as messengers/ etc.) Would you have anything to add? This is one of my weak points. Casliber (talk · contribs) 02:08, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Fred Moosally imageThe new image is in place [1]. Cla68 (talk) 02:53, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
Do you still copy-edit? My recent lurking expeditions reveal that you are doing more image reviews, but I'll ask anyway... To be quite blunt about it, could you take a look at the Banker horse article? Your name has been recommended by 545397483979123 people (Trust me; I counted.)and your work on the Intro to Evolution article caught errors I didn't even know existed! The Banker horse article probably has errors that go unnoticed by me but would make an English teacher's eyes bleed. And we don't want that now do we?!?!?! Haha. No pressure. --Yohmom (talk) 23:14, 29 January 2009 (UTC)
The WandererI have both Doody's biography and the CC to Burney (plus some minor works referring to the novel) if you need any information to expand the page. Ottava Rima (talk) 22:13, 30 January 2009 (UTC)
Indestructible (Disturbed album) song sampleI am continuing the discussion we started previously, as the FAC has been closed. Your last reply was: "If there is no "critical commentary" available to describe the differences, we cannot justify inclusion of the audio clips, especially since the differences are as minimal as you say. Note that WP:NFC states "Music clips may be used to identify a musical style, group, or iconic piece of music when accompanied by appropriate sourced commentary and attributed to the copyright holder." - We need commentary in the article if we are going to have the clips. Awadewit (talk) 08:14, 30 January 2009 (UTC)" Well, I may have some critical commentary to describe these two songs, stylistically. The band states in the "Making of Indestructible" DVD documentary that these two songs were made specifically for the fans, etc, etc. Up to there is already in the article. Well, since there is an entire chapter on the documentary devoted only to these two songs, this can obviously be expanded, especially for "Perfect Insanity", and only slightly for "Divide". I just had a question regarding the song "Divide" (I already know I have enough coverage for "Perfect Insanity", it being a single from the album). There's very little about it, specifically, on this DVD. The band members mention it in passing, but a few things specifically stood out to me. Regarding both of these two songs generally, the band members were stating how these songs forced themselves to look back and see the evolution of their sound. I'm describing kind of badly, but they're basically comparing the versions of the song then, to the modern versions, saying that it forced them to see how far they've advanced, musically. I was wondering if this is substantial commentary to justify the clips. --The Guy complain edits 01:19, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Mozart: thanksThank you for your support and help in getting Mozart in Italy to Featured status. I appreciate your help in the effort to expand the encyclopeadia's featured classical music content. My next music project, for later this year, is likely to be List of operas by Richard Wagner, including not only those we know all about, but his many aborted projects, too. Brianboulton (talk) 11:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC) Thanks for your work on DYK's and your comment on my DYK and notification on my page. I have modified the hook and the article to reflect that West 8 was part of the team that won the contest to carry out the project. It's still a big deal I think (A New York Sun article I just put on the talk page until I have time to add it says it is a $400 million dollar project) in New York City. I also added a couple alternate hooks and a creative common photo from Flikr if someone will upload it. ChildofMidnight (talk) 21:47, 31 January 2009 (UTC) Dickens DYKHi there. Actually, Dickens had an interest in the supernatural, hence the fact so many of his 'Christmas Books' were ghost stories, including A Christmas Carol, The Railway Man, etc. The strangeness of the 'prophesy' concerning Sydney's death was also commented on by Peter Ackroyd in his 1990 'Dickens' biography. However, if you want to put up an alternative DYK with mine please feel free to do so. Jack1956 (talk) 22:01, 31 January 2009 (UTC)
Messaline synopsisSorry about the copywright. I totally thought I had reworded it but I guess I got distracted. Give me a few minutes and I will substantially rewrite it. Thanks.Nrswanson (talk) 01:11, 1 February 2009 (UTC) Thanks and a thingCheers for nomming HT for TFA. Much appreciated. And now I'll ask you one more time: Will you have a chance anytime soon to review I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings? If not, we'll find another person for the last pass. (But it would be best to have the best.) Scartol • Tok 11:42, 1 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK for two of the plays in Tonight at 8:30Hello. You questioned the source for the fact that four of the plays in Tonight at 8:30 were written and added to the play cycle afer its opening. I had cited this article from the Shaw Festival website that says "Compiled and written by Shaw Festival Corresponding Scholar Leonard Conolly". The Shaw Festival is a well-respected organization, known for its dramaturgy, and this source would have the same level of reliability as their program notes. There were contemporary reviews that noted this fact, but I don't think any of them are online. The Manchester Guardian 16 October, 1935, p. 11 shows that the play was not one of the original six performed. The NODANW summary of the plays shows that the two mentioned in the DYK hook were added later. Is there a better way to use these sources? Should I change the hook? -- Ssilvers (talk) 03:14, 2 February 2009 (UTC)
USMA FACHowdy. I believe that all of your WP:IUP concerns have been addressed on USMA's FAC page. Could I ask you to verify and strike concerns if that is the case? Thanks! Ahodges7 talk 00:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
John CalvinCould you again give us your two cents over at Talk:John_Calvin#Caps_etc.? Grazie! --Flex (talk/contribs) 19:12, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for archivingHi A, Thanks for archiving Talk:Joseph Priestley House. I had left a link in to one of my sandboxes, and then found the draft a large list of 135 bridges transcluded in the middle of the talk page. Whoops! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 22:05, 3 February 2009 (UTC)
Thank youAwadewit, thanks for your review of I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings. I will attack your great comments as I have the time. I'm sure that after I'm done, the article will be greatly improved, so I appreciate your input. --Figureskatingfan (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Hello! I am notifying you that a article you previously reviewed for FAC has been nominated again. Please, if you can, take the time to see if the article has been improved enough to consider supporting, and if not, let us know what needs improving. :) BOZ (talk) 23:18, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
DYK for Rambles in Germany and Italy
Dravecky (talk) 03:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC) DYK for Le Constitutionnel
Dravecky (talk) 03:24, 5 February 2009 (UTC) CinderellaPlease see my response at the article talk page. I hope I have addressed your concerns. --Thomprod (talk) 16:37, 5 February 2009 (UTC) SighI am obviously unable to make it clear to this user here that a 150 year old biography written by an associate without any sense of objectivity is not an appropriate basis for a Wikipedia article. Can you try to talk to them? I give up. I would rather bang my head into a wall than continue trying, and I think I might just do that now. Ottava Rima (talk) 21:57, 5 February 2009 (UTC) Expiring DYK nomCould you look over WP:TDYK#CAP computer again? I believe I have addressed the issue that was raised. Thanks–OrangeDog (talk • edits) 00:48, 6 February 2009 (UTC) Wikipedia Weekly Episodes 69 and 70Wikipedia Weekly Episodes 69: Sixth Sense and 70: Under the Microscope have been released. You can listen and comment at their pages (69, 70) and, as always, listen to all of the past episodes and subscribe to the RSS feed at wikipediaweekly.org. – wodupbot – 06:22, 8 February 2009 (UTC) You're receiving this because you're listed on Wikipedia:WikiProject WikipediaWeekly/delivery. If you'd like to stop receiving these messages, please remove yourself from that list. DYK submission The WandererPlease check this submission as it's been challenged, thanks, Gatoclass (talk) 06:45, 8 February 2009 (UTC)
Wikipedia Signpost, February 8, 2009
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list.--ragesoss (talk) 15:35, 9 February 2009 (UTC) Delivered by §hepBot (Disable) at 21:26, 9 February 2009 (UTC) |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portal di Ensiklopedia Dunia
