User talk:LOTRrules

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Link to The Wikipedia Signpost

• Archive 1: June 2007 - February 2008
• Archive 2: February 2008 - March 2008

Archives

I archive every 50 topics. So if you have recently left a message for me and do not see it anymore on my talk page, feel free to look through the archives below to view my response. [Archive 1] [Archive 2]

Contents 1 Image 2 How? 3 Image violation? 4 Work 5 Oversourcing 6 The Hive 7 Out of universe of Hagaren 8 To Stub or Not to Stub? 9 User:Uthanc 10 The Watcher in the Water 11 Do you have to be Jewish to join? 12 Image copyright problem with Image:TBLOTR.jpg 13 Non-primary references 14 10,000,000th Article 15 Edit summaries 16 Ima Hogg 17 WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter 18 April GA Newsletter 19 Your GA nomination of Watcher in the Water 20 Orphaned non-free media (Image:NWP.jpg) 21 Image copyright problem with Image:THiveRE.jpg 22 WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter 23 WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter 24 Pollokshields 25 Reminder 26 WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter 27 Edward Elric 28 Meaning? 29 List 30 WikiProject Good articles newsletter

[edit] Image

Image is a fair use violation. Clearly there the fair use rationale is made is a lie. I placed a better image on it why did delete it? LOTRrules (talk) 18:49, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Explain how the image is a fair use violation. FightingStreet (talk) 18:50, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

"No free Alternative"? There are images on google that have smaller images than this...the fact that the fair use says no free alternative could exist is a clear violation because again there are lots of images with a simple websearch. LOTRrules (talk) 18:55, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

These images that appear on Google are copyrighted by Namco, just like yours or mine. That's what "No free alternative" means. Your image is just as good as mine, but let's use the one that was uploaded first. FightingStreet (talk) 18:57, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

But yours violates the rule. Its proportions are much bigger. Use a smaller one. It'll avoid copyright issues. LOTRrules (talk) 19:06, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

I've reduced its size now. FightingStreet (talk) 20:11, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for listening. LOTRrules (talk) 20:19, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] How?

How did you get that nifty Brazillian avatar on the bottom right had screen that stays there if roll back and forth? LOTRrules (talk) 20:26, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

It's a javascript trick. code - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 20:30, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you. How do you think mine looks? LOTRrules (talk) 20:36, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Nice, I've done some resizing to make it look a little better. - Master Bigode from SRK.o//(Talk) (Contribs) 20:54, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image violation?

guy uploaded is this image in fair use violation because the guy who uploaded it won't let me replace it with this one which is lower in resolution: one that I uploaded. Please help. LOTRrules (talk) 19:02, 17 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi. Sorry, but I find our image policies almost impenetrable. --Dweller (talk) 11:49, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Work

This article needs a lot of work. I'll take that up. I'll clean up most of the article in coming future and hopefully it will look much better. Contact me or write on this talk page if anything else is going to happen with the article because I don't want problems arising. LOTRrules (talk) 23:44, 8 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for cleaning up the article. It looks a lot better. I'll work on the article more as well, but there is one thing. Maes Hughes is not a State Alchemist, he never has been. I'll fix this problem. —Preceding unsigned comment added by E-lord (talk • contribs) 18:49, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

You're welcome. Any time. Plot would be a sufficient heading to begin with. The title you have had layed down was too long; the neccisity of the rest of the article seemed redundant then. His roles are already explained in the Anime and Manga sections. I hope this article can reach GA soon. LOTRrules (talk) 19:28, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, plot certainly doesn't make sense if it's a character. Characters don't have plot; I'll use this in the meantime, but I'll try to think of something else. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.66.108.40 (talk) 19:44, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

Plot does go with character. LOTRrules (talk) 20:26, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

Sakura Haruno Has a similar plot section. This makes sense. LOTRrules (talk) 20:27, 12 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oversourcing

According to WP:Verifiability, the most important things to source in an article are the things that are challenged or LIKELY to be challenged. You don't need to source absolutely EVERYTHING in the article, and it's very unbecoming to use the same source two or three times in the same sentence. Follow the spirit of Wikipedia's rules: Not the letter. King Zeal (talk) 18:11, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Hive

Can you just outline the problems instead of telling me its in-universe. It's a fictional laboratory so how can I get out-of-universe info if it's in the games and there is no out-of-universe info...the construction section tells who built it and what the story is like. How can I get information on who else built it if all the info is from the game and in the game? LOTRrules (talk) 17:57, 19 March 2008 (UTC)

What you should be looking out for is how this fictional facility affecting anything in the real world. Mentioning in the lead section how this part of the film affected the Resident Evil games is good, but it needs a lot more of information to that effect.

Almost all the sections simply explain the plot of the game. A good "construction" section would explain details on how the sets for The Hive were constructed in the real world, and how the scenes were filmed. Take a look at Spoo to get an idea of what to do. --Lenin and McCarthy | (Complain here) 18:47, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. LOTRrules (talk) 11:49, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Out of universe of Hagaren

I have been for out of universe info of characters from Fullmetal Alchemist and found this and this. I suppose there are also some books from Fullmetal Alchemist with conception information. I also found a lot of reception. Since my english is not very good I ll only work in reception.

Also, about the references of the list of manga chapters, I can use the website of amazon but it would be better to use the most reliable source. Well, regards.--Tintor2 (talk) 22:19, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Hey, thank you. Since your English isn't that good I assume you're Japanese? Anyway thank you for the articles referances section I will work on them on the next few weeks (with you). Also are you trying to get this to featured status? Like the Naruto chapters? Because that is what I want. See you soon. LOTRrules (talk) 22:26, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Well, Im from South America, Argentina and Im still studying english. I left my doubts of the summaries in the talk page of the manga list. See you.--Tintor2 (talk) 22:30, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

Thanks again then. LOTRrules (talk) 22:41, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I have been expanding the out of universe info of the Edward Elric article. The image should be replaced something of color. Have you thought in some image? I couldnt decide.--Tintor2 (talk) 16:00, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I have added a plot overview section and tagged it for expand. The personality needs to be cleaned up while it would be necessary to create a background section. I ll see what I can do later. See you--Tintor2 (talk) 17:13, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added it to my to-do list and I'll contact you later I'm a bit busy in RL. LOTRrules (talk) 17:15, 24 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] To Stub or Not to Stub?

Is this really a stub page if this is all the info we have on it?? -- Alcarillo 16:43, 29 Apr 2004 (UTC)

You could add something about it probably being created by Morgoth in the First Age before anyone was around to name it but it would only be speculation. However, it would seem probable that after the fall of Morgoth (at Utumno and at Thangorodrim) some of the creatures he created fled and hid in various places, like outside Moria. I refrain from adding this in until interest can be guaged or in case I am incorrect. Hydraton31 11:25, 8 May 2006 (UTC)

Also needs an infobox (character) and image, at least. SkierRMH 06:09, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll fix up the article. LOTRrules (talk) 20:22, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I've sorted out most of the article and added an infobox. LOTRrules (talk) 21:18, 22 March 2008 (UTC)

I've added extra information to the article. I think it's past the "stub" stage since I've put in a lot of information. LOTRrules (talk) 00:25, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] User:Uthanc

The Watcher in the Water article has recently been improving and is still building however User:Uthanc keeps moving the book illustration picture to the adaptations section. He has repeatedly moved the picture even though the style of writing says that a book illutration image is supposed to go in the top or at least near the top. I have talked to him but he ignores me, I was wondering if you could tell him to stop shifting the image and naming it falsely because the image is an illustration from a book not a screenshot of the film. LOTRrules (talk) 17:23, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I'm not an administrator, so I don't have any authority to deal with user disputes, I'm afraid. If you're having issues with someone I suggest that you contact him/her on their talk page so you can discuss the conflict rather than simply reverting and edit warring. In this case, however, I believe that you're mistaken if the image you're referring to is Image:WITWLOTR.jpg. The image is obviously a screenshot from the film; it says as much at the website where you obtained it and in the provided licensing tag. Uthanc appears to be correct although I still say that you need to contact them personally rather than simply relying on an edit summary to make your argument for you. Take care, María (habla conmigo) 17:49, 25 March 2008 (UTC)

I contacted the guy and he says its the art from the movie not film footage. Nonetheless I found a new picture. LOTRrules (talk) 14:33, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Watcher in the Water

Hello there, what do you think of the article of the now? We have added in more reliable sources and fixed most of the mistakes I think. LOTRrules (talk) 16:21, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

The article has definitely improved but it still requires work, especially in the formatting and MOS areas. I'm glad you were able to find some scholarly references to rely on; the more the merrier. If you plan to re-nominate it for GAN, another user should probably take a look at it in order for you to receive another POV on the matter. Good luck! María (habla conmigo) 16:31, 27 March 2008 (UTC)

I didn't see I can't review it. I simply think it would be a better idea for you and other contributors to receive an outside opinion during a second GAC review. I also have other things in the works and have limited time available for new reviews at the moment, sorry. María (habla conmigo) 00:24, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Do you have to be Jewish to join?

I'm a Muslim and I know lots of info on the Jewish people but not enough I think to satisfy me. I'm multi-cultural and I like to learn about people's cultures... LOTRrules (talk) 20:45, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

I mean the Wikiproject. LOTRrules (talk) 20:46, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

You wrote at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Judaism#Do_you_have_to_be_Jewish_to_join.3F "Do you have to be Jewish to join? I mean the Wikiproject."
I don't think that Wikiprojects are allowed to exclude people on this kind of basis. I'm a member of a number of Wikiprojects whose "groups" I'm not a member of in "real life" (including WikiProject Judaism). As long as you follow the general Wikipedia rules on NPOV, civility, edits with good cites, not edit warring, etc; and the guidelines and goals of that individual Wikiproject; and as long as you are honest with other editors, IMHO there shouldn't be any problem. -- Writtenonsand (talk) 23:25, 28 March 2008 (UTC)
-- (Incidentally, that's a lovely masjid in the photo in the lower right corner of your page. :-) ) - Writtenonsand (talk) 23:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Thank you for the explanation I am now a member! And thanks for the comment! LOTRrules (talk) 23:42, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:TBLOTR.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:TBLOTR.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. NOTE: once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. STBotI (talk) 16:02, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Sorted. I had forgotten to add it during upload. LOTRrules (talk) 19:05, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Non-primary references

Hi -- I've noticed you're using www.tuckborough.net as a reference for much of the information about Treebeard. These references are not as helpful as references to the text itself, which the Project Standards WP:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards say we should be using in preference to secondary and tertiary references.

Also, it would help if you could post changes in larger batches! All those individual edits really clog up the project change page. Thanks! Elphion (talk) 18:08, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

Hi thanks for message. I'm using Tuckboriugh just now because I look at the primary referances later aince they take a while to look for in the book. This is just a start. Upon completion I'll use Tolkiens work more often. Hope you understand. LOTRrules (talk) 18:11, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

More on references: I'm not sure whether you're done yet, but I just want to reinforce that references like "J.R.R. Tolkien, The Two Towers" are also not quite enough; it really helps to include the chapter name, as some of your other references do. (I just include the book title and the chapter name. I don't bother with "J.R.R. Tolkien" or a page number -- for these four books -- since the pagination varies so widely from edition to edition.)

At a guess, it looks like you're trying to drive your edit count up. You're certainly dominating the page history! Elphion (talk) 22:36, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Not extaly trying to increase my edit count. I just spot mistakes or I want to upgrade the article or add more info in after I press the save button. That way the article improves and I get the edits as a bonus. I'll get proper references later, you should see what I have done with Watcher in the Water after it was finally completed. LOTRrules (talk) 15:10, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

Be careful; the "bonus" may not be what you think. There is widespread disdain among seasoned editors for this style of editing, and people do check on your style. Beyond that, there are downsides for other editors: as I mentioned, your constant churning fills up both the page history (making it difficult to assess the value of your edits), and the project history (making it harder to find anything else). Don't get me wrong -- noone objects to coming back to fix a typo, etc.; but for general editing it makes more sense to work on a section at a time, not a phrase at a time. Elphion (talk) 15:20, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] 10,000,000th Article

10,000,000th Article is on the following link. Congradulations Wikipedia and the Wikimedia Foundation.[1] LOTRrules (talk) 19:03, 29 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edit summaries

LOTRrules, I noticed during the Watcher GA review that you put a lot of effort into improving articles, which is great, but it would be helpful if you used edit summaries. While I was reviewing the article's history, I spent a lot of time checking out each edit's detail since I couldn't tell what you were doing just by reviewing the edit summary. Not only does this help other editors, but it facilitates vandalism control and helps you when you're looking for a particular edit. Also, you tend to make numerous small edits. Try either using the Preview button more and grouping these incremental edits together, or, if you're planning on a decent sized revision to an article, consider copying the whole (or part of) the article to a sandbox page for work offline. Then you can copy it back to the article wholesale. Just some ideas that might make life easier. Thanks.
Jim Dunning | talk 23:28, 31 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Ima Hogg

This [2]was unnecessary. WP:CIVIL and all that. Xdenizen (talk) 16:20, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films March 2008 Newsletter

The March 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:26, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] April GA Newsletter

The April issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter is now available. Dr. Cash (talk) 03:56, 7 April 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 6 - April 2008 March issue | May issue Project News There are currently 3,868 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 195 unreviewed articles. Out of 267 total nominations, 57 are on hold, 13 are under review, and 2 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: A4232 road, New York State Route 63, Great American Boycott, First Great Western, Duck Soup, Sanja Matsuri, Code of Conduct (affiliate marketing), Prospect Mountain Veterans Memorial Highway, Aliens (film), and Roanoke Regional Airport. The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (27 articles), Sports and recreation (25 articles), Transport (24 articles), Music (19 articles), War and military (19 articles), Politics and government (18 articles), Religion, mysticism and mythology (16 articles), Literature (14 articles), World history (14 articles), and Video and computer games (14 articles). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 12 articles up for re-review. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of March, a total of 92 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 74 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 18 were delisted. There are currently 14 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. Congratulations to Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), who sweeped a whopping 51 articles during the month! Jackyd101 (talk · contribs) also deserves congrats for sweeping a total of 26 articles! Reviewer of the Month Dihydrogen monoxide is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for March, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Dihydrogen monoxide hails from Brisbane in Queensland, Australia, and has been editing Wikipedia since April 6, 2007. He has contributed to 8 Featured articles and is an avid reviewer and contributor to the Good articles program. Other reviewers should check out his Noob's Guide to GA Reviewing. Congratulations to Dihydrogen monoxide! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of March include: GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs) Limetolime (talk · contribs) Malachirality (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) Wrad (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 195 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 13 new members that joined during the month of March: AndreNatas (talk · contribs) Dank55 (talk · contribs) English836 (talk · contribs) ExplorerCY (talk · contribs) JayJ47 (talk · contribs) Mastrchf91 (talk · contribs) MBK004 (talk · contribs) Million Moments (talk · contribs) Neparis (talk · contribs) Nicholas Perkins (talk · contribs) NimiTize (talk · contribs) PGPirate (talk · contribs) Zenlax (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! To delist or not to delist, that is the question So you’ve found an article that, on the face of it, does not merit its good article status. What next? Especially where there are many glaring issues that need addressing, it’s tempting to just revoke its GA status and remove it from the list, but although we are encouraged as editors to be bold, this approach (known to some as "bold delisting") is not recommended good practice. There are many reasons why a listed article might not meet the assessment criteria—it’s always possible that it never did, and was passed in error, but more likely the criteria have changed or the article quality has degraded since its original assessment. Either way, we should treat its reassessment with no less tact and patience than we would a fresh nomination. This, in fact, provides a good starting point for the delisting process. Approach the article as though it has been nominated for GA review. Read it and the GA criteria carefully, and provide a full reassessment on the article talk page. Explain where and why the article no longer meets the criteria, and suggest remedies. Having explained why the article no longer meets current GA criteria, allow its editors time to fix it! In keeping with the above approach, it may help to treat the article as on hold. There is no need to tag it as such, but give editors a reasonable deadline, and consider helping out with the repair work. Bear in mind that more flexibility may be required than for a normal hold—the editors did not request or expect your reassessment and will probably have other projects taking up their time. They may not have worked on the article for months or even years, and at worst the article may have been abandoned and its authors no longer active. As always, communication is the key. It sometimes helps to post messages to relevant WikiProjects (found at the top of the article talk page), or to contact editors directly (this tool is useful for identifying active editors for any given article). Only once the above process has run its course, and sufficient improvement has not been forthcoming, is it time to think about delisting the article. Communicate your final decision on the article talk page, even if there was no response to your reassessment and hold, and take the time to fill in the various edit summaries on the article talk and GA list pages to ensure the delisting is transparent and trackable. If you have any doubts about your final decision, you can list the article at Good article reassessment or contact one of the GA mentors, who will be happy to advise. Article reassessment is perhaps the single most controversial function of our WikiProject, and the one with the most potential to upset and alienate editors. Yet it is one of the most necessary too, since without the ability to revoke an article’s status we would be unable to maintain quality within the project. However, if we approach reassessment sensitively and with the goal of improving articles to the point where sanctions are unnecessary, we will ensure that delisting is the last resort, not the first. Delisting instructions From the Editors As we near the 4,000 Good Articles milestone, the project continues to grow and to gain respect in the Wikipedia community. Nevertheless, we continue to have a large backlog. If every member of WikiProject Good Articles would review just one article each day during the month of April, the backlog would be eliminated! Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (GA Sweeps and Did You Know correspondent) EyeSerene (Article) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: • Impalement arts • Backlash (2007) • Sam Cowan • U.S. Route 491 • Sphinx Head Reassessment: Madonna (entertainer) • Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 213 articles (42 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 11 June 2008 | edit

[edit] Your GA nomination of Watcher in the Water

The article Watcher in the Water you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Watcher in the Water for things needed to be addressed. Mr. Absurd (talk) 04:11, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

I've left a couple more comments on the talk page. Mr. Absurd (talk) 22:31, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Orphaned non-free media (Image:NWP.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:NWP.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 12:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Image copyright problem with Image:THiveRE.jpg

Thank you for uploading Image:THiveRE.jpg. However, it currently is missing information on its copyright status. Wikipedia takes copyright very seriously. It may be deleted soon, unless we can determine the license and the source of the image. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Pagrashtak 20:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films April 2008 Newsletter

The April 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 01:14, 1 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good Articles May Newsletter

The May Newsletter for WikiProject Good Articles has now been published. Dr. Cash (talk) 22:16, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 7 - May 2008 April issue | June issue Project News There are currently 4,050 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 195 unreviewed articles. Out of 227 total nominations, 16 are on hold, 14 are under review, and two are seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Fighting Tommy Riley, Brock Lesnar, Cluj-Napoca, Wolf's Rain, Brian Kendrick, and North and South (TV serial). The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (45), Sports and recreation (34), Music (18), Transport (15), World history (14), Politics and government (13), and Places (12). The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 17 articles up for re-review. GAN Reviewer of the Month Noble Story (talk · contribs) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for April, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Noble Story joined Wikipedia on May 16, 2007. He is a big fan of the Houston Rockets, and edits many related articles, as well as articles on basketball in general. Congratulations to Noble Story (talk · contribs) on being April's GAN Reviewer of the Month! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of April include: Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs) Drewcifer3000 (talk · contribs) Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs) Gary King (talk · contribs) Jbmurray (talk · contribs) Kaypoh (talk · contribs) Lpangelrob (talk · contribs) Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) Realist2 (talk · contribs) Redtigerxyz (talk · contribs) ThinkBlue (talk · contribs) Member News There are now 212 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 17 new members that joined during the month of April: Affinity likely (talk · contribs) Climie.ca (talk · contribs) Edmund Patrick (talk · contribs) Eustress (talk · contribs) IMatthew (talk · contribs) Kironide (talk · contribs) Makeshift Thackery (talk · contribs) Mm40 (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) Noble Story (talk · contribs) Peanut4 (talk · contribs) Realist2 (talk · contribs) SorryGuy (talk · contribs) Sushant gupta (talk · contribs) ThinkBlue (talk · contribs) WBOSITG (talk · contribs) Will381796 (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! GA Topic Do you know what a GA topic is? If you are not nodding your head, or don't know what I'm talking about, then you should pay attention to this article. There are ten GA top-level topics (but you will spot the eleventh as this article goes along). These topics are: Arts, Language and literature, Philosophy and religion, Everyday life, Social sciences and society, Geography and places, History, Engineering and technology, Mathematics, and Natural sciences. Each of these topics are further narrowed down to more specific topics. For example, Arts can be narrowed down to Art and architecture, Music, and Theatre, film and drama. But let's not get into sub-topics in this article because of its depth. Now you will probably ask, "I already knew this, so what is your point?" What I want to illustrate is that some people often forget a step when they promote an article to GA. After they have posted their review in the article talk page, added the article name to the corresponding topic in the good article page, increased the GA count by 1, and added the {{GA}} to article talk page, many reviewers tend to forget to add the topic parameter in {{GA}} or {{ArticleHistory}}. You can browse the topic parameter abbreviations at on this page as well as what each top-level GA topic means, because sometimes it can be chaotic and confusing to pick a topic. For example, should On the Origin of Species be placed under the Natural Science topic (because it's related to evolution), or under the Language and Literature topic (because it is a book)? The correct answer is to place it under Language and literature topic, because its categorization as a proper title supercedes other categories. Let's go back to the page that shows GA topics; does anyone spot the eleventh topic? Yes, Category:Uncategorized good articles is the 11th topic, only it shouldn't be there. Articles that do not have a topic parameter in either {{GA}} or {{ArticleHistory}} will be placed in this category. The topic "Uncategorized" is not very informative, is it? So if you have time, you can consider cleaning up the articles that are left in this category and move them to the appropriate category by adding a topic parameter. That's it for this month, I hope you learned a little from it. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of April, a total of 26 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 15 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and two were delisted. There are currently six articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. One article was exempted from review because it was promoted to FA. Two articles were exempted from review because they were already delisted by another member in the community. We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details. Did You Know... ...that there are slightly less than twice as many Good Articles as Featured Articles? ...that the total number of Good Articles and Featured Articles combined is 6,085? ...that different languages have different symbols representing GA? (Alemannic uses , Bavarian uses , Czech and French use , Estonian, Icelandic, and Swedish use , Esperanto and German use , Polish, Spanish, and Turkish use , Portuguese uses , Russian uses , Ukrainian uses ) Note: Lithuanian and Serbian have their own symbol but only uploaded locally. Other languages not listed above either have the same symbol as english or they don't have GA process. From the Editors There is currently a debate on adding a small green dot to the top right corner of all Good Articles that pass the criteria, similar to the small bronze star that is added to the top right corner of Featured Articles. Members of WikiProject Good Articles are encouraged to participate in the debate on this page. Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor, Distributor) OhanaUnited (Article, GA Sweeps and Did You Know correspondent) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: • Impalement arts • Backlash (2007) • Sam Cowan • U.S. Route 491 • Sphinx Head Reassessment: Madonna (entertainer) • Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 213 articles (42 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 11 June 2008 | edit

[edit] Pollokshields

Hi. Why have your last two edits to Pollokshields been deletions? Please use the edit summary, particularly when removing stuff for no obvious reason. --Escape Orbit ^(Talk) 21:14, 20 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reminder

Wikipedia:WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards LOTRrules (talk) 18:04, 29 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Films May 2008 Newsletter

The May 2008 issue of the Films WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 20:08, 31 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Edward Elric

What the article needs to pass GA is conception info and manga plot summary. Do you have conception info? If so, add and I ll make the manga summary and source most things.Tintor2 (talk) 19:54, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Meaning?

What do you mean the Dol Guldur needs "*lots*" of work? See the talk page that I'v documented in the past few days. Expansion on history, etymology and culture are I'm sure at their peak. However the other sections do look a bit weak I'm sure. All I need are the refs from the Hobbit and unfinished tales, two books which I have not as of yet read. LOTRrules (talk) 20:11, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

I have seen the talk page. See my additions there. I'm not trying to be unfriendly, and I appreciate the effort you've put into the article, but the organization and language need improvement. I hope to interest you in providing that. As the talk page indicates, I think you should address the structure first.  Elphion (talk) 20:44, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] List

• Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep?
• Fahrenheit 451
• The Player of Games

LOTRrules (talk) 20:12, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

==Notes

• WITW VOE
• WITW before me
• []
• []
• []

LOTRrules (talk) 23:56, 6 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] WikiProject Good articles newsletter

The Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles Newsletter

The WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter Volume I, No. 8 - June 2008 May issue Project News There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at WP:GA. The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance! The oldest unreviewed articles are: Choctaw, One Night Stand (2007), Justin Tuck, Tristan Tzara, The Stake Out (Seinfeld episode), Impalement arts, Backlash (2007), Adelaide Rams, and Sam Cowan. The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11) The backlog at Good Article Reassessment currently stands at 4 articles up for re-review. GA Sweeps Update The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions. We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and criteria. If you are interested, please contact OhanaUnited for details. GAN Reviewer of the Month Giggy (talk · contribs) (a.k.a. Dihydrogen Monoxide (talk · contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to Giggy (talk · contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month! Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) Eustress (talk · contribs) GaryColemanFan (talk · contribs) Ice Cold Beer (talk · contribs) Juliancolton (talk · contribs) Nikki311 (talk · contribs) ThinkBlue (talk · contribs) Yllosubmarine (talk · contribs) Also, with 19 nominations, Mitchazenia (talk · contribs) is the nominator of the month, followed by TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) with 8 nominations submitted. Member News There are now 216 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to the 6 new members that joined during the month of April: Jack Bethune (talk · contribs) Jordan Timothy James Busson (talk · contribs) Limetolime (talk · contribs) Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim Fan (talk · contribs) Mm40 (talk · contribs) Redmarkviolinist (talk · contribs) This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all! New GA Review Process - Review Subpages In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable. When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at WP:GAN in the appropriate category. When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the Good Article criteria, as well as to the Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter. Did You Know... ... that there are slightly more than twice as many Good Articles (4,266) as there are Featured Articles? ... that Giggy has some really neat and useful tools to assist reviewers in conducting their reviews? ... that there are ten experienced reviewers listed on the GA mentors list that can offer assistance or a second opinion in reviewing articles? From the Editors A GA working party has initiated discussion on ways to improve the Good Article project and processes. The goal of the working party is to come up with suggestions for improvement based on recent issues and concerns raised in the past, primarily in the wake of the Great Green Dot Debate of May 2008. The discussion can be found here. Members of the working party include: Dank55 (talk · contribs), Derek.cashman (talk · contribs), EyeSerene (talk · contribs), Giggy (talk · contribs), Gwinva (talk · contribs), LaraLove (talk · contribs), Nehrams2020 (talk · contribs), and OhanaUnited (talk · contribs). Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue here. Contributors to this Issue Dr. Cash (Lead Editor) Giggabot, Giggy (Distributor) Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005! WikiProject Good Articles: Open Tasks This project identifies, organizes and improves good articles on Wikipedia. Nominations: • Impalement arts • Backlash (2007) • Sam Cowan • U.S. Route 491 • Sphinx Head Reassessment: Madonna (entertainer) • Sweeps / List: references (All Categories), image tags (All Categories), article quality (All Categories) Possible GAs Needing References: Clarinet • Carleton University • Appalachian Mountains Task forces: Project quality • Unreferenced GA Good article criteria | Statistics | GAN Report | Changes log Nominations queue: 213 articles (42 of them are on hold) as of 08:00, 11 June 2008 | edit

Delivered by the automated Giggabot (stop!) 01:49, 9 June 2008 (UTC)