Jump to content

User talk:Khazar2/Archive 9

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 5←Archive 7Archive 8Archive 9Archive 10Archive 11→Archive 15

Advice?

Hi, I'm toying with the idea of attempting to review a GAN - a brave step which has me quivering with fear! There is a nomination that I'm familiar with already as I reviewed it for DYK. However, I also made a couple of very minor copy edits to it, literally changing two words. My questions are: would this prohibit me attempting to do a GA review for it? If it is okay for me to do the review, is there a way to make sure I've done it adequately/correctly? Sorry to bother you but like it or not you have now been nominated as my go to GAN expert and this is a big step up for me from DYK reviews! What is the quote I'm looking for?........."one small step for GA, one giant leap from DYK" - with apologies to Neil Armstrong! SagaciousPhil - Chat 21:19, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey, I'm really glad to hear you're thinking about doing some GA reviews! It seems intimidating at first, but is actually pretty simple once you know the criteria.
I don't think it's against the rules, but personally my suggestion would be to not review for GA one that you also reviewed for DYK. It's good for articles advancing up the ladder to have a variety of reviewers, when possible; another reviewer might catch new issues that you won't and vice versa.
But I hope you won't let that stop you, since there's all kinds of easy-ish reviews waiting in the queues. Very limited, discrete topics like a television episode, song, book, or minor biography are a great place to start, since it's easier to check them for coverage of "main aspects" than a topic like, say, "democracy" or "human civilization". My favorite essay in learning to be a GA reviewer was WP:GACN, which breaks down what's worth flagging and what you can ignore. The biggest advice I can give is to not sweat anything that falls outside the GA criteria, which are really fairly narrow. The most common way that reviews become contentious is for a reviewer to get insistent about an issue like dead links, reference formatting, MOS compliance, overlinking, comprehensiveness (beyond the "main aspects" the GA criterion requires), etc. It's helpful to offer whatever suggestions you want, of course, it's just important to differentiate the side comments from things the nominator actually needs to work on.
And as for making sure you've done it right, don't worry about that too much. GA reviews have a wide range of styles, so there's not necessarily a "wrong" way. If a nominator or others strongly disagree with you on a pass or fail, they can always renominate for assessment, and that's a normal part of the process, too. Anytime you have a question about the criteria, you can post at WT:GAN for a second opinion. All that said, if you want to ping me to "shadow" your first review, I'd be glad to--just let me know when it starts.
Hope this helps! Let me know anytime you've got questions... -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:14, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you, that's seems like very sound advice and the essay appears to give me a good springboard to work with. I've had a quick flick through some of the nominations and will try having a go at Luo Yigu. I'm working on the assumption that as I don't know much about the general subject, if I gain a reasonable understanding of the person via the article, it means it has served its purpose. Also as another editor began an initial review, I can assess what has already been done.
I'll note at the start that I haven't reviewed a GA nomination before and mention I will have someone check it over - that would be you, by the way! Thank you again for being so helpful. SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
I've raised a couple of queries in my review of the article. Once you get a little time, would you mind/be able to do a quick run over it here, please? I'm getting fairly thick skinned, so feel free to shout at me! Thank you! SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:32, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Your points look reasonable to me. I added a second opinion there with two minor points of my own, neither of which is a big deal. And yeah, sometimes the editor who doesn't know much about a subject is the ideal reviewer; it puts you in a better position to ask for context, definitions, etc. that might not occur to the expert. (In any case, we have no hope of finding experts to review everything that comes through GA!) Usually a quick Google search is enough to show you if any "main aspects" are left out--it's a much lower bar than the "comprehensiveness" required at FA. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:50, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you! I did notice the image licenses but thought as they were PD in China, it was okay; I'll remember in future that it also needs US PD - it's always good to get any extra information and adds to my learning curve! Date formats are something I need to make a priority to sort out; unfortunately, I often see DYKs I've checked being amended when they reach the main page, so it is an area I'm going to ensure I make a conscious effort to standardise. I very much appreciate you taking the extra time to help me, so thank you again. SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:26, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem. I'd reviewed at least 40 GAs before I properly understood that US PD tags were required regardless of other countries' PD tags. And the dates aren't relevant for GA criteria, just mentioning it to MBO as a side issue. Anyway, glad to see your first review's going well--hope it's the first of many! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:41, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Murder of Sagar Sarowar and Meherun Runi

Khazar2, I would appreciate any advice you might have for me on developing the Murder of Sagar Sarowar and Meherun Runi. Thanks, Crtew (talk) 10:07, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad to! Will take a look this evening if not before. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:24, 8 April 2013 (UTC)


putin regime - "mafia state" anachronism

[1] hi i want to get more people to discuss the mafia state anachronism so to get some real multi user consensus, what is your opinion and please tell us at the given wikipedia talkpage link Peterzor (talk) 19:00, 8 April 2013 (UTC)

what do you mean?

i do not understand your post at putin talkpage, can you please explain? Peterzor (talk) 08:20, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Attempted to clarify there. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:44, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

North Devon's Biosphere Reserve GAN

Hi Khazar2, I've renominated North Devon's Biosphere Reserve. It'd be great if you could look over the article again if you've got time, I've tried to address the paraphrasing issues. Cheers, Jack (talk) 16:46, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad to hear it! I'm going to let a new reviewer pick this up, though, just so it has the benefit of a second pair of eyes. Good luck, and thanks again for all your work on it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:42, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Sounds good, good luck on your one a day. I'm really impressed!! Jack (talk) 20:20, 9 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm about 30 ahead at this point, so if I break my typing hand or something, I'm still good for a while. We'll see if I can keep it up, though. =) -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:23, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

re World Press Freedom Day

Why don't you post a notice about this at WT:WikiProject Freedom of speech, and we can all discuss it centrally, there? — Cirt (talk) 19:26, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

I suggested the same to Crtew. It's mainly his idea, so I'll let him take point. Glad to hear you might be interested too! -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:28, 9 April 2013 (UTC)

Mapping the Global Economy

Hi Khazar2, I am looking for volunteers to re-create the link below for all 196 countries. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User:Mcnabber091/Economy_of_the_United_States The goal of this project is to map out the global economy. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Mcnabber091 (talk • contribs) 03:17, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

I'm going to have to pass; not really my specialty. -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:24, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Congratulations

100000 Edits
Congratulations on reaching 100000 edits. You have achieved a milestone that very few editors have been able to accomplish. The Wikipedia Community thanks you for your continuing efforts. Keep up the good work!

If you like you can add this userbox to your collection.

This user has been awarded with the 100000 Edits award.

```Buster Seven Talk 14:26, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Wow, thanks! That one really snuck up on me. =) -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:27, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Yeah, if not for AWB typo fixes, though, I imagine I'd be around 30-40,000. So take with a heavy grain of salt! Not that that's going to stop me from putting it on my user page, mind you... -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:31, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Congrats! Makes me 100,000 times happy that I got you back here, twice ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:48, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, Gerda! -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:03, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

A beer for you!

Congrats on your 100,000 edit count! Enjoy the virtual beer, cheers! ComputerJA (talk) 14:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Cheers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:42, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Congrats on your 100,000 edit count! Cheers! The next one is on me! ```Buster Seven Talk 14:49, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
Whoa, slow down fellas, it's only 9 in the morning here! ::considers, shrugs, drinks anyway:: Cheers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:51, 10 April 2013 (UTC)
A chaser — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:05, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

Delish... -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:52, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

FYI

Related to our discussion from WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech:

United States v. The Progressive is now a candidate at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests, you can discuss it there under its entry for 2 May 2013. Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 03:36, 11 April 2013 (UTC)

Re:Instant Karma's gonna get you

Hello Khazar2. Can I request the GA put on hold for a few days? Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 19:15, 31 March 2013 (UTC)

No problem at all. I'll check in in a week or so and see where we're at. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:57, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Yea I'm still interested, I've just been busy (irl and on-wiki), and have forgotten about it on several occasions. I'll work on the critical responses section sometime tomorrow. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 22:34, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Great, thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:10, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for the review Khazar2, even if it didn't pass. Thanks again. Best, yeepsi (Talk tonight) 11:09, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
You're very welcome--cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:24, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, and have some pierogi!

Pierogi Award
Thanks for your GA review, have some traditional Polish pierogi! Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 02:55, 12 April 2013 (UTC)
Delicious, thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:56, 12 April 2013 (UTC)

Prison raid

"This is not human rights violation, I want to be firm on this"... remember this? I think it's getting to the point where an article would be worthy. At the very least a government minister needs to learn about the right to a fair trial. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:31, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

Definitely seems like it's hit notability. I may try to start this one in the next 1-3 days, I'll ping you if I do--and you ping me if you beat me to it! -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:08, 13 April 2013 (UTC)

GA review for Wings (Little Mix song)

Hi there! I have responded to your review on Talk:Wings (Little Mix song)/GA1, sorry for the delay! - Littlemixlove (talk) 17:13, 14 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, responded there! -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:22, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Mandela at GA

If you feel that the time is right, then you have my blessing to go for it. I will however continue to add Meredith references, and I hope to flesh out a few other sections, such as "Collapse of the coalition", over the coming days. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 15:52, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

That sounds fine--I don't see any reason why that would interfere with the GA process, even if this one gets picked up right away. I'll go ahead and nominate now. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:26, 15 April 2013 (UTC)

Leona Woods GA review

Hi, I have arrived at your door again complete with begging bowl in hand! I am trying to do another GA review and Leona Woods caught my eye as she seemed an interesting character. If you get the chance, would you mind double checking my novice attempts at reviewing it? I have raised a query as a couple of the refs give conflicting info about her degree. Any help or comment would be very much appreciated! SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:06, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

Always glad to double-check. Will comment there. Thanks for continuing to review! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:59, 16 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you - as always your expert help is much appreciated! SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:58, 16 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Cebongan Prison raid

Hello! Your submission of Cebongan Prison raid at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Sonoma's bridge (talk) 13:15, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Orme

Yeah, this was my first GA. Thanks for the barnstar and thanks again for taking the time to review the article. Cheers, Edwarddutton (talk) 21:13, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for the review of the Tim Breslin article at GA. Also thanks for archiving all of those citations, I know that can be a pain in the neck. Cheers --Mo Rock...Monstrous (leech44) 14:04, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! And no problem on the archiving; I just used Webcitation's comb tool, which does a whole page at once. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:18, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you

Many thanks for, as ever, a thorough, helpful and courteous review of Romanticism in Scotland. Its good be feel the article is worthwhile and that it has been genuinely improved by the process. Very much appreciated.--SabreBD (talk) 23:11, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:15, 18 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For your tireless work in helping me get Nelson Mandela into ship shape condition! Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:03, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Hey, thanks! But if I've been tireless, you've been... super-tireless? Thanks for all the expansion. I'm excited to put this one through GA. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:08, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

GAN for Wizard (horse)

Hello, you are going to end up being sick of me constantly pestering you but here I am back again! I have been GA reviewing Wizard (horse). It seems more or less fine to me but would you mind giving it a quick glance over, please? Thanks! SagaciousPhil - Chat 15:19, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Nope, feel free to ask whenever you want! As it happens, I was already watching this one, as I reviewed Edward's last nomination (which passed easily) just two days ago--this'll be only his second. I'll take a look now. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:58, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
Thank you once again! I do enjoy reviewing articles and as I sometimes have a problem finding DYK nominations that take my attention, I may spend a bit more time over at GA - the main drawback is I will encroach on your time a bit more until I feel really confident about my reviews. I have some 'proper' work (yuk - subbing specialist reports with horrendous typing, mis-spelt, poorly written and half of the required information missing; where are the Nurofen?), which I hope to batter through today. I still have my eye on the GA nomination for Anthony Chenevix-Trench which really appeals and has been sitting for about five weeks but I did the DYK review for it in February so know I should not give way to temptation. SagaciousPhil - Chat 07:53, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
No problem. These days my #1 project on Wikipedia is reducing the GAN backlog, so I'd much rather spend 10-20 minutes looking over your shoulder at a review than 1-3 hours reviewing it myself. I really appreciate what you're doing.
As for Chenevix-Trench, if it's calling out to you, it's not against any rule that I know of to do both the DYK and GA review, even if it's not ideal. I'd be glad to double-check you in this case, though, so I don't see how anyone could be concerned about shenanigans. So I say go for it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:30, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Ace! Thanks, I'll nip across and claim it before printing it off and working through it - I really do appreciate your help. SagaciousPhil - Chat 14:37, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Great! I've got my stepson here for the weekend, so won't be on much, but should be back around Monday or Tuesday. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:39, 20 April 2013 (UTC)
Hope you're having a good weekend! I've done a run through on the GA for Anthony Chenevix-Trench and raised a couple of questions - once you get a chance at the start of the week it would be brilliant if you could have a look. No hurry as the nomination has sat for quite a while already, so just whenever you get a chance. Your help is always appreciated. SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:08, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
Took a look this morning; unfortunately, the WP:SPS issues raised by another user seem insurmountable. I'm embarrassed to say, though, that this is something I wouldn't have caught if she/he hadn't pointed it out first. I need to get better about checking the reliability/non-vanity-nature of presses. Anyway, I'll keep it on my watchlist if it gets contentious, but my take is that this will need a substantial rewrite. -- Khazar2 (talk) 19:12, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Cebongan Prison raid

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Press Freedom Day

Not too bad, I think. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 11:41, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Good stuff! I might break my usual shunning of DYK and put something up myself... will see if I have time. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:26, 20 April 2013 (UTC)

Merge discussion for Velocette MAC (WD)

An article that you have been involved in editing, Velocette MAC (WD) , has been proposed for a merge with another article. If you are interested in the merge discussion, please participate by going here, and adding your comments on the discussion page. Thank you. Sincerely, SamBlob (talk) 08:39, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Editor of the Week

You recently submitted a nomination for User:Tomobe03. This is to inform you that the award has been distributed and to thank you on behalf of Editor of the Week. The possibility of friendly stalking prevented previous contact. Feel free to continue searching for candidates. The future of the project depends on nominations. ```Buster Seven Talk 15:52, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind thought re eotw nomination. I was really surprised to see the message just few minutes ago - it really means a lot to me.--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:20, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
You're very welcome. I'm a big admirer of your articles! -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:05, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

M. Rahman

I know you haven't started working on the revision yet and Parkwells made a good start, but he's put in a major factual error by mixing up defamation and sedition charges. M.R. was charged with sedition twice in 2010 and 2012. He has been charged with defamation every year from 2009 to 2012. Crtew (talk) 20:23, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for letting me know. I've got my stepson here this weekend, so won't be making all of my usual editing rounds, but I should be able to check back in on this one on Monday or Tuesday. Since incorrect listings of charges are a major BLP issue, don't be shy about reverting this yourself if it hasn't already been fixed. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:27, 21 April 2013 (UTC)

Flat "huh"

Just... wow. I'm all for religious tolerance, but somehow this is just over the top. (Also, theologically, wouldn't they have been able to repent for their "sin" of being seen in public through fasting and extra prayers? Allah is described as "the most merciful", after all... except when it comes to shirk) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:07, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, really terrible case. I was actually just discussing this one with Mrs. Khazar last week, as it happens, because it's in an episode of The West Wing that we watched. Do we have an article on it? I'm on my way out the door now but may search later. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:14, 22 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Good, that's an incident that definitely needs one. (Had an energy crash and didn't make it out the door after all--but as usual, the outside world's loss will be Wikipedia's gain!) -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:25, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

Anonymous (group)

I am interested in the page as well as some others that I've seen you active on and noticed that you want to bring it up GA status. Is there anything in particular that you think needs to get taken care of? I'm definitely interested in helping out. Dreambeaver(talk) 02:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hey Dreambeaver, I'd love to collaborate on that. I started work on it back in February, but got sidetracked by a few other articles. Tell you what, I'll do a readthrough tomorrow or Wednesday and then post my thoughts to the talk page there. You can take a look too and between us perhaps we can work up a "to do" list and go from there. Looking forward to it! -- Khazar2 (talk) 02:14, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Anthony Chenevix-Trench

Hi Khazar2, thanks for your input over at the Anthony Chenevix-Trench GA review. The red mist descended yesterday morning when I saw the comments on it, so I had to leave it alone for the day (I went across and annoyed everyone at DYK instead!). It feels as if I've had a baptism of fire with this one but it has also been a very steep (painful?) learning curve. I've put the review on hold for seven days, in the rather forlorn hope there might be more response on the RS board. It seems such a shame that such a well-written, comprehensive article will not receive any recognition but that's life. Your help as always has been very much appreciated. I pulled another nomination for review Talk:Seneb/GA1 before this all blew up, so I'll see what a mess I can make of that one later today! SagaciousPhil - Chat 08:34, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, I'm really sorry that one turned out to be contentious. As you say, for a book that was widely reviewed and available, it never would have occurred to me either that it was from a vanity press. Your solution of waiting seven days to make sure there's no further RS/N comment is a good one. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:06, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Seneb

Hi, I've stopped sulking - well, mostly - so have continued to review Seneb. Would you mind doing a double check for me once you get the time? I am, as ever, grateful for your patience and tolerance! SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:27, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for your constructive comments - I've left a note on Prioryman's talk page. SagaciousPhil - Chat 18:08, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
My pleasure! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:09, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Editor's Barnstar

The Editor's Barnstar
For all the work you have done on First Amendment to the United States Constitution. SMP0328. (talk) 21:56, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! It's been a fun one to work on. And kudos to you for getting the 17th up to GA! -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:57, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
You're welcome and thanks. SMP0328. (talk) 22:41, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Press freedom

Perhaps you have some extra sources about Erwin Arnada? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:46, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Ha, not on hand. But I'll be interested to look over the article later. I'm actually working on a press freedom fellow right now, as it happens, attorney Dan Paul from Miami Herald Publishing Co. v. Tornillo. I'll put it up for DYK later today. -- Khazar2 (talk) 15:06, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • That sounds really good. Looks like an interesting case... although admittedly not one I would have thought of. I took it for granted that newspapers wouldn't give equal space to all candidates... — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:15, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Yeah, it is interesting. You can see where the Fairness Doctrine type laws came from, but it's for the best, I think, to not have that regulated. And Dan Paul was a surprising character--had his hands in everything, and also got badly stabbed once in a semi-scandalous case. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:30, 24 April 2013 (UTC)

Mam Sonando

Looking over the article really quickly, you should have information about his life between the arrests and (at the very least) a notice that the page has Khmer script. Also, the 2012 section is quite a bit heavier than the others. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:45, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Unfortunately, there's very little information about him beyond his arrests and general career outline, at least in English-language media and books. The reason for the emphasis on the 2012 arrest is that it resulted in a ten-year prison sentence and international cry, while the others never came to trial (and therefore had correspondingly less coverage). I agree that it's not ideal, but it's the best I can do with the sources.
As for the Khmer script, what kind of tag should I add? The user who added the Khmer text for his name noted on the page that it was Khmer text, but I can post an additional notice if needed. Thanks for taking a look, much appreciated! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

Fidel Castro

Hello there Khazar, hope you had a good weekend with the step-son! I was wondering if you had much interest in helping out over at the Fidel Castro page ? I've been writing and building the article up for a few years now, in much the same way as I have been doing with the Nelson Mandela page (and the Muammar Gaddafi page, but I'm not focusing in on that one at the moment!), and having discovered your interest in Cuban political history through the Oswaldo Payá page, I thought I'd message you to see if it would interest you. At the moment, I'm mostly engaged in editing down the length of text, particularly from the section dealing with the Bay of Pigs Invasion downwards. Hopefully it will be in a state appropriate for GA review in the near future. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:26, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, we had a great time; he's at an age where his perfect weekend is nonstop video games, board games, and movies, which is a pretty darn good weekend for me and Mrs. Khazar too. That's terrific that you're building up the Castro page, I'd love to see it hit GA. I've let my to-do list get a little too long to pitch in for now, unfortunately. But ping me in a month or so and remind me, if you're still working on it then; I'd be very interested to help, even if it's just with trimming, copyediting, MOS, etc. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:33, 23 April 2013 (UTC)
Glad you had a good weekend! On an unrelated note, there is a discussion as to whether Mandela's first wife was notable enough to warrant her own Wikipedia page over at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Evelyn Mase. It might interest you to weigh in. Best, Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:15, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Yeah, I was just looking at that, actually. My first reaction was that that AfD was absurd, but on re-reading the policy I think Dodger might have a good point. Will think it over and chime in soon. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:18, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Writer's Barnstar
On behalf of WP:WikiProject Freedom of speech, thank you for your quality improvement efforts at First Amendment to the United States Constitution, much appreciated! — Cirt (talk) 16:24, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I'm going to try to write a few spinoff articles in the coming week, like Dan Paul, to possibly put up for World Press Freedom Day. Will keep you posted. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:25, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
Anytime you want to collaborate with me on a quality improvement project for Hustler Magazine v. Falwell, you let me know? At the moment I'm working on trying to get Fuck (film) up to WP:GA quality status! ;) Cheers, — Cirt (talk) 02:39, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Nice! And I will let you know on Hustler v. Falwell, but I warn you that it could be a while--my To do list is getting mighty long these days! -- Khazar2 (talk) 11:37, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
No worries, keep me posted, — Cirt (talk) 13:23, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
We have an article for "no worries"? How great is that! I love working here. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:26, 25 April 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I wrote that one and got it up to WP:GA quality a while back as part of a quality improvement drive related to Australia and WP:WikiProject Australia. ;) — Cirt (talk) 00:36, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

First Amendment to the United States Constitution - Potential sources and/or Further reading

Here are some potential good sources to help improve/expand the article, or perhaps to just add to the Further reading sect :

  • Curtis, Michael Kent (2000). Free Speech, "The People’s Darling Privilege": Struggles for Freedom of Expression in American History. Duke University Press. ISBN 0822325292.
  • Godwin, Mike (2003). Cyber Rights: Defending Free Speech in the Digital Age. MIT Press. ISBN 0262571684.
  • McLeod, Kembrew (2007). Freedom of Expression: Resistance and Repression in the Age of Intellectual Property. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 0816650314. {{cite book}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)
  • Lewis, Anthony (2007). Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment. Basic Books. pp. 173–176. ISBN 978-0-465-03917-3. OCLC 173659591. {{cite book}}: Invalid |ref=harv (help)
  • Nelson, Samuel P. (2005). Beyond the First Amendment: The Politics of Free Speech and Pluralism. The Johns Hopkins University Press. ISBN 0801881730.

Of all of the above, the best one is by far Freedom for the Thought That We Hate: A Biography of the First Amendment, by two-time Pulitzer Prize recipient, author Anthony Lewis.

Hope the above is helpful,

— Cirt (talk) 00:42, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! The Lewis book was one of my main sources on the expansion, I really enjoyed it. The GA review was opened this morning, so I'm going to leave it for a bit, but I may add the rest to further reading once it's closed. I appreciate your sharing these -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)
No worries, and once again great job on it so far, — Cirt (talk) 03:25, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Calling a spade a spade gets you fined $1.5 million

Check out this bit about Tommy Suharto. You get arrested for murdering a man, get convicted, and then take a magazine to court when they label you "convicted murderer"... and win? Oh my. (More).

And, the best part? He wants to be President. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:10, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Ugh. -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:03, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Fuck (film)/GA1

Thanks very much for doing the GA Review - I've responded to all your initial recommendations, very good suggestions so I just implemented all of them. :) — Cirt (talk) 21:32, 27 April 2013 (UTC)

I replied to your 2nd set of comments. Again, they were all very good recommendations so I implemented all of the suggested changes. I also noted that I have no objections to all of your copyedits. — Cirt (talk) 05:12, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks very much

Thanks ever so much for the barnstar for Fuck (film). Most appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 05:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for writing it! I'd been mildly interested in that one from the reviews, but not sure when I'd get around to seeing it. Now I can just feel like I saw it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 05:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Ha! Next step would naturally be Peer Review ... but I've got one Peer Review ongoing and one FAC ongoing. Instead of and/or in addition to Peer Review, I could put in a request at WP:GOCE, but I have three pending there already so I think I'll have to wait, or just go for Peer Review at some point depending on how the other stuff is going. — Cirt (talk) 05:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
You do indeed have your hands in a lot of pies. Good luck getting this one down the pipeline, though--I'll look forward to seeing it on the front page someday. -- Khazar2 (talk) 05:24, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Thanks! I'll probably need it! ;) — Cirt (talk) 05:26, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Ah, now I re-read the instructions at WP:PR, I noticed, Nominations are limited to one open request per editor.. So ... in the meantime, I can't nominate to Peer Review, and I can't nominate for WP:GOCE, guess I really only can wait. :( Any other thoughts on how to move this along? — Cirt (talk) 15:57, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

The only path I can think of would be to reach out to editors you know individually to request comments, perhaps offering a quid pro quo of offering peer review on articles of their choice? That way you could get the feedback you're looking for even if it's not through the formal system. I don't have much experience at FA, though, so I don't know if that would be sufficient prep. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Good ideas, and I may try that as well, but I think I'll also wait in the meantime for the more formal path to clear up, and focus on some other freedom of speech related projects in the interim. ;) — Cirt (talk) 16:21, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Cool, good luck! -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:22, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Clean up using AWB on George W Byng

Hi - Just a small thing - I notice that the AWB cleanup on George W Byng has removed underscores from the image name. I am curious as to why - as underscores (according to the image upload screen) are legal in filenames? Perhaps there is some other reason? - Just so I know. Thanks. Richard J Myers (talk)

  • (talk page stalker) This edit, right? For a better answer you should contact WP:AWB, but I'll try to answer. The software generally tries to avoid template redirects to reduce server load (hence the changes of {{cn}} to {{citation needed}}); a similar reasoning may be behind the underscores (after all, file names are saved without underscores). Otherwise perhaps because it simply looks cleaner. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi, thanks, but I'd like to point out that the AWB page guidelines also state: "Do not make insignificant or inconsequential edits. An edit that has no noticeable effect on the rendered page is generally considered an insignificant edit. You also talk about change from {{cn}} to {{citation needed}} - well in this edit the change has been the other way - from {{citation needed}} to {{cn}} Richard J Myers (talk)

  • Huh? You're looking at the diff backwards. The edit was from cn to citation needed. As for minor edits: there was a hyphen which was added. That is not "insignificant or inconsequential edits" under the AWB guidelines, as it affects grammar. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:19, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi - thanks, point taken about the diff, but all the changes apart from the hyphen still have "no noticeable effect on the rendered page". Richard J Myers (talk)

  • It's not readily noticeable, but it is noticeable and visible (i.e. it causes a visual change to the rendered article). None of AWB's edits that I've seen would be considered "major edits" (i.e. readily noticeable edits), as defined by WP:MINOR. Considering this hyphen thing slips past review processes all the time (I've seen Khazar pop by some FAs; AWB still finds issues) it is certainly better to have semi-automated. If you disagree about hyphens being noticeable changes, the discussion could be continued at Wikipedia talk:AutoWikiBrowser. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:50, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi Richard, you're quite right about some of the changes in the edit having "no noticeable affect on the rendered page", but the edit itself did have an effect on the rendered page, making it valid. The "full-time" is the only reason I pulled the trigger on that edit.
I believe Crisco's explanation about the underscoring is the right one, but to be honest, some of AWB's autoformatting measures are beyond my understanding. I've long since disabled that function on my AWB; it looks like the edit you're asking about is eight months old, which surely is past the statute of limitations to complain about an inconsequential edit showing up in your watchlist. =) If you consider the underscoring is a significant issue, you're obviously welcome to revert. Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:39, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Triple Crown

I, Casliber award Khazar2 with this Triple Crown for exceptional content improvements to Wikipedia. Thank you for all you do. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:01, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 21:02, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

Gertie the Dinosaur

That was by far the fastest anyone's gotten to any of my GANs (less than a day since I put it up). Thanks a lot, again! Curly Turkey (gobble) 22:34, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome-- I always liked this movie, so I couldn't resist. -- Khazar2 (talk) 22:52, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Thanks! Even though the DAB checker is right there on the review page, I get going with the criteria checklist and forget to click it sometimes. -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:25, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

This is awesome. Thanks for the tip-- Khazar2 (talk) 22:30, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Stanley Bruce nomination

Hi Khazar2, not to preempt proper procedure, but you were really awesome when you reviewed my last attempt to bring an article to GA status - James Scullin. Well I've taken your advice on board from that experience and put a great deal of work into Stanley Bruce and hope that this time I'm much closer to GA and would really like to go to FA as well. Since you were so helpful last time I'd be very pleased if you'd do the honors this time as well if its appropriate and convenient. Cheers Unus Multorum (talk) 01:45, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Unus, glad to see you're still working on these! The new one certainly looks good at a (very) casual glance. Unfortunately, I've got a number of articles on my list at the moment, so I can't make any promises for when I might get to it; for now I'll leave it in the queue and see if somebody beats me to it. If I get a chance in the coming weeks, though, I'm definitely interested, so we'll see. Thanks for thinking of me for this one. -- Khazar2 (talk) 01:54, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Update

Hi, just thought I'd let you know that I failed the GA nomination for Anthony Chenevix-Trench this morning. There didn't seem much point in waiting until tomorrow when the seven days were officially up, as no further comments had been made on the reliable source noticeboard. As always, thank you for your much appreciated (and needed) help with this. SagaciousPhil - Chat 10:10, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

You're very welcome! Sorry that one didn't make it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:17, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

I am sorry

Didn't notice Sarajevo concert was already GA. I am so sorry. Please, feel free to revert anything I do wrong.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:50, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Sorry again. Revert everything if you think so!! My Bad :( Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:51, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
I was trying to nominate them for FA. can you help me??? Reply at my talk please.  Miss Bono (zootalk) 18:53, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
As for my work on U2 articles. You're welcome. And it's no problem for me. I am a HUGE fan and I don't mind working on them. Everything for Wikipedia and U2. Cheers!!!  Miss Bono (zootalk) 19:20, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks much

Thank you for your helpful comments at Talk:No worries/GA2, much appreciated, — Cirt (talk) 19:56, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Glad to chime in. I've been meaning to get more active at WP:GAR again. -- Khazar2 (talk) 20:19, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Maroon 5 meets salah

My classmates seemed really irked that I supported the students on this (opinion piece; video (uploaded by someone else, judging by the title)) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 22:52, 29 April 2013 (UTC)

Yeah, disheartening story, that. -- Khazar2 (talk) 12:18, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
  • Yeah, I've heard of that one actually (from Cracked.com of all places... they were slamming [post-]modern visual art). That's... far more aggressive indeed. I'd fear for the artist's life if he did that, about Islam, in Indonesia. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:18, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Template {bare URL} and siblings

Hi. Template: Cleanup-bare URLs with numerous redirects is evidently intended to cover bare URLs, bare numerals, and bare linknames --that is, "plain links (where the reference is a link and a title)" in the User: Dispenser/Reflinks documentation lead.

So a revision such as yours in the Joe Haldeman biography (literally two revisions) is a minor improvement. It doesn't resolve the problem that the template is supposed to flag. In this case the article title "Hamit: LepreCon 38: A Con The Way They Used To Be" as a linkname does not even clearly identify "Hamit", evidently the author Francis Hamit. Nor either part of the page title(?) "Joe Haldeman: File 770".

(Also in the Haldeman biography there remains one literally bare URL, currently ref #12.) --P64 (talk) 17:01, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi again. Evidently there is a history of discontent regarding template {bare URL} aka {Cleanup-bare URL}. I added my own suggestion, Template talk:Cleanup-bare URLs#Bare linkname(s), and I expect to use the redirect {bare linkname} sometimes. --P64 (talk) 17:28, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
Okay, I'll answer there. Sorry for missing #12. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:59, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Request for review?

Hello, I read your profile and one of your to do list of 2013 is to review one GAN everyday. I currently have an article up at GAN and was wondering if you would like to take up on it? Best, jonatalk to me 04:29, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

I tend to not do a lot of music articles, so I honestly don't know if I'll get to that one. It looks like a good one at first glance, though--thanks for your work on it! -- Khazar2 (talk) 04:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
That's fine you don't have to do it and thanks :D. Best, jonatalk to me 13:40, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Barrington Court

Thanks for your review of Barrington Court. I've hopefully addressed the grammar issues etc you identified. If there is anything else which needs doing please let me know.— Rod talk 09:44, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks - your review (and edits) have definately helped to improve the article.— Rod talk 16:11, 1 May 2013 (UTC)
Thanks, you're very welcome. -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:13, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

Request for extended hold on Jelena Balsic GAN

Khazar2, I just thought I'd let you know that Antidiskriminator has requested that you extend the hold on the Jelena Balsic GAN from 7 days to 14 days because he's traveling a lot this week. You may have already seen his request, but I don't know if you did or not, seeing as you haven't replied. However, I do understand that you may have seen his request but decided not to reply because he might not see it anyway. AmericanLemming (talk) 03:06, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for pinging me on that one! I had indeed missed it. -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:49, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Khazar2. You have new messages at Al Ameer son's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

--Al Ameer son (talk) 22:09, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Jonathan Pollak

Excellent work with the Pollak article. When I saw it in my watchlist, I wasn't sure what was going on, but I noticed it was much improved. I'm assuming it was you who put in the extra elbow grease. Did you rewrite from scratch? It looks worlds better than how I remember it. czar · · 23:43, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! Yep, I'm not an admin so couldn't even see the old version. Figured it would be better to start from scratch anyway. I ran into his name when writing about Bassem al-Tamimi but kept forgetting to follow up until today. It's still pretty rough, though, so throw in or rearrange anything you like! -- Khazar2 (talk) 23:45, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Dan Paul

The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

First Amendment Thingy

I put it on hold as there are a few minor issues. Otherwise a nice (I was going to say little but that is the one thing it's not :) ) article. Sorry it took so long to get back to you.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 22:02, 3 May 2013 (UTC)

GA Thanks

This user helped promote Enrico Fermi to good article status.

On behalf of WP:CHICAGO, I would like to thank you for your editorial contributions to Enrico Fermi, which has recently become a GA.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 07:54, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

My pleasure! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:00, 4 May 2013 (UTC)

Good Article

The Law Barnstar
This barnstar is hereby awarded to Khazar2 for their work in taking a WikiProject Law Top-importance article to GA standard. Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 13:41, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Woo hoo! Thanks! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:42, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Khazar2/Archive_9&oldid=1204691972"