Jump to content

User talk:Gfoley4/Archives/2012/May

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

USRD WikiProject Newsletter, Spring 2012

[edit]
Volume 5, Issue 2 • Spring 2012 • About the Newsletter
Departments
Features
State and national updates
Archives • Newsroom • Full Issue • Shortcut: WP:USRD/NEWS
—Imzadi 1979 → 00:10, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

[edit]

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

[edit]

Twitter not reliable?

[edit]

How come a comment on the official twitter of somebody doesn't count as a "reliable" source? I believe that's first hand source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Artcuate (talk • contribs) 11:07, 9 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See WP:TWITTER #4. I believe this is a joke, and there is doubt in my mind of its authenticity. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 01:18, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Flushing and North Side Railroad

[edit]

How did my article on the Flushing and North Side Railroad earn a C-class rating? I'm not complaining, not by a long shot. I just want to know what I did right. ----DanTD (talk) 00:27, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

See here. In my opinion, the article you made is way better than a "start" class. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 01:12, 10 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

[edit]

A barnstar for you!

[edit]
The Special Barnstar
Thanks for your contributions. SwisterTwister talk 01:29, 19 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

[edit]

AIV

[edit]

How can you simply clear the page without taking any action on these vandalism reports? That simply makes no sense. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 03:06, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Oops, I should have put a better edit summary. Anyways, IP #1 was not really vandalism and rather stale. IP #2 should be taken to WP:AN3 as it is edit warring, not vandalism/spamming. IP #3 should be taken to WP:ANI as it is again not vandalism. The account should have no action taken on it again as it is not vandalism and I'm not sure on the possible outing. Finally, the IP you reported did not, in my view, did not actually vandalize. It's not obvious that the IP was trying to harm Wikipedia. They should be cautioned to used edit summaries to explain their edits although. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 03:14, 23 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can comment only on the IP I listed, who has repeatedly removed those, and other, templates from Willy Wonka-related articles, despite being asked numerous times not to do so, or to explain his reasons for doing so. He has failed on both counts. The repeated deletion of legitimate templates, despite warnings, and in the absence of an explanation, seems like vandalism to me. Perhaps you would have better luck convincing him? ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 14:26, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I can agree that the editing is disruptive – but I didn't view it as enough to block at that time. I will put the page on my watchlist and will certainly consider blocking the IP if they continue. —GFOLEY FOUR!— 18:06, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. I appreciate that. ---RepublicanJacobiteTheFortyFive 03:25, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Articles for Creation Appeal

[edit]
Articles for Creation is backlogged and needs YOUR help!

Articles for Creation is desperately in need of reviewers! We are looking for urgent help, from experienced editors and administrators alike, to help us clear a record backlog of pending submissions. There is currently a significant backlog of 1630 submissions waiting to be reviewed. These submissions are generally from new editors who have never edited Wikipedia before. A prompt, constructive review of submissions could significantly editor retention.

Do you have what it takes?
  1. Are you familiar with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines?
  2. Do you know what Wikipedia is and is not?
  3. Do you have a working knowledge of the Manual of Style, particularly article naming conventions?
  4. Are you (at least) autoconfirmed?
  5. Can you review submissions based on their individual merits?

If the answer to these questions is yes, then please read the reviewing instructions and donate a little of your time to helping tackle the backlog.

Click here to review to a random submissionArticle selected by erwin85's random article script on toolserver.

We would greatly appreciate your help. Currently, only a small handful of users are reviewing articles. Any help, even if it's just 1 or 2 reviews, would be extremely beneficial.

On behalf of the Articles for Creation project,
AndrewN talk 23:47, 25 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 May 2012

[edit]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Gfoley4/Archives/2012/May&oldid=1151051149"