User talk:Go Phightins!/Archive 23

Archive 20

Archive 21

Archive 22

Archive 23

Archive 24

Archive 25

→

Archive 30

DYK for John Strollo

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week: well-sung heroes

Regarding your recent comment, just a note that based on the editor's user page, the editor in question indeed has been the recipient of many barnstars. isaacl (talk) 14:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Adopt

Hi there Go, I got your message on my talk page and I'm very interested in your adoption system. Definitely count me in! Justin.Parallax (talk) 08:51, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, hope this is the correct place. I'm ready to give test one a shot. Let's rock. Justin.Parallax (talk) 16:26, 17 October 2013 (UTC)

Adopt

Hi, Go Phightins!I'm quite new at Wikipedia.Could you adopt me?--Paleocemoski (talk) 20:34, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi, and welcome to Wikipedia! I am just getting back in to adopting right now, and don't want to burn myself out with it, so I will close myself off after you, but certainly, I can handle two adoptees at once. Long story short, yes, I can adopt you. Give me a few days to set up your classroom, but feel free to preview at User:Go Phightins!/Adopt. Go Phightins! 03:02, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks a lot.--Paleocemoski (talk) 10:19, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 October 2013

• News and notes: Vice on Wiki-PR's paid advocacy; Featured list elections begin

• Traffic report: Peaceful potpourri

• WikiProject report: Heraldry and Vexillology

• Featured content: That's a lot of pictures

• Arbitration report: Manning naming dispute case closes

• Discussion report: Ada Lovelace Day, paid advocacy on Wikipedia, sidebar update, and more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 02:25, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin

Hi. Since you contributed to the discussion resulting in the ban of Wikiexperts, you may want to consider the CEO's appeal at Wikipedia:AN#Ban Appeal of AKonanykhin. --Anthonyhcole (talk · contribs · email) 17:42, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

Thank you (and Buster7 too and everyone else involved) for the Ed'O'Week award. Because of the new notification system I found out about it ahead of time, but it was still a great surprise and was, and still is, very much appreciated!! I want to boast about it to my brothers and sisters and maybe a couple of friends but before I do I was hoping you would update the Wikipedia:WikiProject Editor Retention/Editor of the Week page. Again, thank you so very much!! All the best. -- Gwillhickers 19:47, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations, Gwillhickers! I added you to the table, but will wait for Buster7 on the infobox - he usually handles that, and I don't want to mess with what he does. Go Phightins! 20:54, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the week

Hi! I'm wondering who created, sponsors, and bestows this award. Yopienso (talk) 21:31, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Yopienso! Editor of the Week was initially conceived by founder of the editor retention wiki-project Dennis Brown, who suggested it I believe at that talk page. I "grabbed it by the horns" and drafted the project in my userspace before teaming up with a conglomeration of editors at WER to found and create it. Presently, it is under editor retention, but operates somewhat independently, primarily run by myself and Buster7. What sparked your interest? Go Phightins! 22:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

You've got mail. Yopienso (talk) 23:59, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

A violin for you!

	Cry me another river
	Your Eagles lost to Dallas by 14, my Bears to Washington by 4. That is all. Seriously, our NFL teams have been getting screwed an awful lot lately. At least you don't have to deal with the crap I'm getting over on Facebook after the loss. ZappaOMati 22:34, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

I know. Sucks to suck. Go Phightins! 22:48, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot

We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot's suggestions. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information on the SuggestBot study page.

IMPORTANT CHANGES: We have modified the selection of articles SuggestBot suggests and altered the design to incorporate more information about the articles, as described in this explanation.

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Content	Headings	Images	Links	Sources	Tagged with…
6		Georgetown Tigers football (talk)						Add sources
103		Snap (American and Canadian football) (talk)						Add sources
5		1931 Ohio State Buckeyes football team (talk)						Add sources
443		Concept album (talk)						Add sources
126		Number (sports) (talk)						Add sources
54		Kill Haole Day (talk)						Add sources
163		Francisco Liriano (talk)						Cleanup
1,439		Ben Roethlisberger (talk)						Cleanup
10		Garden Spot High School (talk)						Cleanup
27		John Mayberry, Jr. (talk)						Expand
127		University of St. Thomas (Minnesota) (talk)						Expand
5		1975 Stanford Cardinals football team (talk)						Expand
174		Society for Creative Anachronism (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
307		Saint-Domingue (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
45		History of the New York Mets (talk)						Unencyclopaedic
19		ST8:USA300 (talk)						Merge
107		Ibrahim Rugova (talk)						Merge
82		Jeweled Shillelagh (talk)						Merge
555		Don Bluth (talk)						Wikify
289		Fashion capital (talk)						Wikify
4		Villa Rica High School (talk)						Wikify
8		Nemonoxacin (talk)						Orphan
4		Asher Salah (talk)						Orphan
1		Arise Gheorghe, Arise Ioan! (talk)						Orphan
57		Brad Sorensen (talk)						Stub
12		Ålgård (talk)						Stub
4		School District 40 New Westminster (talk)						Stub
8		1995 Wisconsin Badgers football team (talk)						Stub
2		Dominican Summer League Phillies (talk)						Stub
5		1964 Indiana Hoosiers football team (talk)						Stub

Changes to SuggestBot's suggestions

We have changed the number of suggested articles and which categories they are selected from. The number of stubs has been greatly reduced, the number of articles needing sources doubled, and two new categories added (orphans and unencyclopaedic articles). We have also modified the layout of the suggestions and added sortable columns with various types of information about each article. The first two columns are:

Views/Day

Daily average number of views an article's had over the past 14 days.

Quality

Predicted article quality on a 1- to 3-star scale. Placing your cursor over the stars should give you a pop-up describing the article's quality (Low/Medium/High), current assessment class, and predicted assessment class.

The method we use to predict article quality also allows us to assess whether an article might need specific types of work in order to improve its quality. The work needed might not correspond to cleanup tags added to the article, since our method is not based on those. We have added five columns reflecting this work assessment, where a red X indicates improvement is needed. Placing your cursor over an X should give you a pop-up with a short description of the work needed. The five columns seek to answer the following five questions:

Content

Is more content needed?

Headings

Does this article have an appropriate section structure?

Images

Is the number of illustrative images about right?

Links

Does this article link to enough other Wikipedia articles?

Sources

For its length, is there an appropriate number of citations to sources in this article?

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:51, 20 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 21

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)

added links pointing to Northview High School, Mountain View High School, Hershey High School and Randolph High School

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 12:05, 21 October 2013 (UTC)

Bert Bell

I am back. You said if I needed help to ask you. Does this sentence belong in the Legacy section of the Bert Bell article: "Bell was 'a man of buoyant joviality, with a rough and ready wit, laughter and genuine humility and honesty, clearly innocent of pretense and [pretension].'

If not, then I will wholesale delete it. I don't think it belongs in the legacy section, at the very least. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 00:32, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Maybe...I think I can rewrite the Final Days section to put it in there. That statement is really from an post mortem remembrance. Yes, that is what I will do. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 00:34, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

I have to drive to Philly and do some research. I am a little rusty on Wikipedia. This edit that you made in the Bell article, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Bert_Bell&diff=544729624&oldid=544729234 , I do not completely like. The deletion of the two sentences that you made were in response to the GA review. The second sentence you deleted I have no problem with you deleting it. The first sentence you deleted is with respect to the author Michael MacCambridge. His book is a very, very good book. You deleted it because of the GA reviewer which wrote:Who said this, and what makes their opinion authoritative?

That being said, I have bigger fish to fry. The GA reviewer tore it to shreds. I did fix one of the two biggest blunders by deleing 1000+ bytes. The GA reviewer wrote "The author of the article has an impressive vocabulary" ...what he meant to say was the editor of this article is really crummy and needs an extra 1000 bytes to say something that should be said simply. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 01:02, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

First order of business is to fix the content with proper research for 1937-1939. I'll deal with that other stuff later. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 01:05, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Hi Ijustreadbooks. I haven't looked at this article in while - I would caution you against your assertion that the GA reviewer, Resolute I believe, "tore it to shreds", as it currently meets the GA criteria, and is listed as such. Regarding my edit that you don't completely like, that content was infiltrated with peacock terms that really were not neutral, and we must write from a neutral point of view. Do you need any specific assistance from me? Go Phightins! 15:14, 22 October 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Go Phightins!. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Baseball.
Message added 02:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Sportsguy17 (click to chat • contributions) 02:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)

Re-imagining Mentorship IEG proposal

Hi there. Since the IEG brainstorming session at Wikimania, the Re-imagining mentorship proposal has been rewritten. As you have expressed interest in the past on this project, I was hoping you would give some feedback on the proposal, as it will soon undergo committee review. You can find the proposal at Meta. Your comments would be most appreciated :) Steven Zhang (talk) 02:08, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Finally got around to...

... actually making a lede on Bryan D. Brown and submitting it for GAN (first time ever doing this, *crosses fingers*). However, I fear the lede goes a bit too far in depth as opposed to summarizing the entire article. I'm not sure what I could remove while still keeping it as an overall summary of the article. Ugh, can't wait 'til I get better at this article writing thing heh. I seem to only be good at random things around here haha. Anywho, would you mind giving it a once-over? I would greatly appreciate it! —  dainomite   03:25, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

I would be happy to take a look at it, but unfortunately, it may not come until Sunday ... I have to attend a wedding tomorrow (somewhat far away), and tonight am fairly busy, but I should get to it by Sunday afternoon/early evening. Ping me if I don't; I probably forgot. Go Phightins! 10:28, 18 October 2013 (UTC)

Sounds good, thank you! Also, it's not an extreme rush or anything, I saw when I was going through the GAN step-by-step that it said there was a months-long backlog. Thanks again, —  dainomite   02:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Just giving a friendly reminder / preventing this from being archived for the time being. Thanks again, —  dainomite   17:36, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

I combined the second and third paragraphs, as they seemed to go together, and did some basic copyedits. I started adding a plethora of commas before removing them when I saw that wasn't the style in which the remainder of the article was written. If I missed any, feel free to remove, as that is a personal preference thing. All in all, I think it looks very good, and should be ready for GA when a reviewer comes along. Go Phightins! 18:52, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Awesome! Thanks very much for taking a look at it GP, I appreciate it. —  dainomite   21:31, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 October 2013

• News and notes: Grantmaking season—rumblings in the German-language community

• Traffic report: Your average week ... and a fish

• Featured content: Your worst nightmare as a child is now featured on Wikipedia

• Discussion report: More discussion of paid advocacy, upcoming arbitrator elections, research hackathon, and more

• In the media: The decline of Wikipedia; Sue Gardner releases statement on Wiki-PR; Australian minister relies on Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: Elements of the world

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 06:46, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter

Books and Bytes

Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013

by The Interior (talk · contribs), Ocaasi (talk · contribs)

Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...

New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian

Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.

New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??

New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges

News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY

Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions

New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration

Read the full newsletter

Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 20:21, 27 October 2013 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for creation/Academy

Now in project space. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:30, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for that very kind gesture on my page. I didn't know such a thing existed. Had I known, I would have thought it would never be approved (as per the kind of complaint in the previous section, which was however summarily dismissed as vexatious). I see you take your handle from the Philadelphia Phillies. I always retain an affection for the city, because the game, comparable to baseball, that I love the most is cricket, and Philadelphia produced a cricketing great, Bart King. Best Nishidani (talk) 13:43, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

You're most welcome – thank you for all of your contributions. I do take my name from my beloved Phightin Phils, for whom I will root despite their tumultuous 2013 campaign. Go Phightins! 19:16, 28 October 2013 (UTC)

WP:AFC/A

I believe you're very good at this sort of thing, so don't hesitate to add yourself. I don't expect there to be a stampede for training, but it would be nice to have some available clued up instructors :) Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 06:21, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Good morning Kudpung. I will add myself at a later date ... I just got back in to adopt-a-user, and have two adoptees, and less on-wiki time than normal due to some items IRL, so I don't want to a) overload myself to the point where I become unreachable to those who I am mentoring or b) burn myself out with too many mentorship tasks, so once I finish with at least one of the adoptees I have now, I will sign up. Thanks for the vote of confidence, Go Phightins! 10:34, 29 October 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for October 30

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2013 Penn State Nittany Lions football team, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Back (sports) (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 14:13, 30 October 2013 (UTC)

Bert Bell

1. "I would caution you against your assertion that the GA reviewer, Resolute I believe, "tore it to shreds", as it currently meets the GA criteria"

Um, "Tore it to Shreds" is an extreme compliment to the reviewer. Maybe I could have rephrased it differently.

1. "Regarding my edit that you don't completely like, that content was infiltrated with peacock terms"

You are right it was peacocky - that's not entirely my fault; if i wrote: "Bell completely sucked at mediating negotiations in the NFL, but "'he was the best in the history of the NFL'" (err- the NFL was only 25 years old at the time), then it would have really the same meaning. Your complaint that it was violated NPOV is not "precise"(which is different than accurate); it's just stupid editing by me. I have not until now understood what peacock phraseology is, until now. There's a big difference between NPOV and peacock usage. Peacock usage is poor editing; NPOV is just what it is.

1. And I will not be cautious; I will rewrite the article with respect to all the GA reviewer's requests.
2. And, thank you for all your help in the article cause it would never be GA without you, case closed, and after 18 months I have to fight inertia but I will make all my edits and then submit it - I don't know how yet to do it, for GA "double-review".

I really want to thank you for all your time and effort, but the article needs tons more work. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 04:46, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

My mistake on misinterpreting "tore it to shreds"; that often has a pejorative connotation, and for whatever reason, it didn't occur to me that was a compliment. Anyway, instead of a GA double review, you could attempt featured article, the highest level of article we have. Right now, it is, and barring a de-listing, which seems unlikely, will remain a GA. Go Phightins! 10:31, 31 October 2013 (UTC)

I just want to fix what the GA reviewer primarily focused on first. I drove down to Philly from NYC last week but the Lower Meridion Historical Society, which has a book I want, is only open 2 days a week and only for 2 hours each day. The most deadly criticism of the GA reviewer is - to create a family life section (oh, the article is missing a super critical comment by his daughter on her father's passing - it's online in some LA newspaper or periodical - she states something to the effect: "Why it was publicly seen as fitting that her father passed away during an Eagles game, that was her dad, and she did not want to lose him". - something like that. It's super critical to find that citation. Without that in the article, that's just wrong, that's bad, that statement has to be found. I totally screwed up losing that comment, that's just a bad job by me.)

Creating a family life section will destroy the fact that he did not buy his first home until, circa 1949. He was poor, the current NFL commissioner is rumored to make about 25million a year. That being said, I can't mess with the GA reviewer. That guy is a freaking genius too. I'll have to create a family section; he's right. You can not write the Eagles went 2-7 in 1937 and Bert's wife popped out his first born son - it's just so stupid what I wrote. Kind of funny really. Ijustreadbooks (talk) 05:25, 2 November 2013 (UTC)

No, this is what I want: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Reference_desk