User talk:Nergaal/Archive 5

This is an archive of past discussions about User:Nergaal. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 1

←

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

Archive 7

→

Archive 9

Congratulations! It's on the main page for the anniversary after all. I feel very good about this. Happy New Year! Regards, —mattisse (Talk) 00:16, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, the naval flag you chose is not legit- the flags must represent a location, and, due to a small problem with the poster (now fixed) your flag was not noticed until now. I have switched it to the flag of Tokyo instead. I hope this is not a problem- the flags shouldn't be a big deal, but if there is an issue with this, please contact me on my talk page. J Milburn (talk) 13:59, 1 January 2010 (UTC)

Please note that in WikiProject talk page banners, |importance=med is invalid - the correct spelling is |importance=Mid; however |importance=mid is a permitted alternative. The full list may be found here. --Redrose64 (talk) 12:23, 2 January 2010 (UTC)

MBK₀₀₄ 05:23, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

			On 17 January 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Diamond, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--candle•wicke 03:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Before reverting you, could you explain why a single, recent, high-pressure experiment is included into diamond as a comparison to water and ice? I would dare to remind you that (i) many exotic phenomena occur at high pressure and there is a convention not to include those into reviews of material properties, (ii) that even journals like nature and science were proven wrong with diamond not once (see e.g. doi:10.1126/science.1139322). Materialscientist (talk) 03:46, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

• I missed that nature article and off course would prefer to read it. If you have a copy, would you be so kind as to email me? If not, never mind - I'll get it tomorrow at work.
• WP is not a newspaper. ITN may be, but not the mainframe articles. Results should be confirmed to be included. Another issue is Nature article said what it said (which I wish to read), but there are so many experimental tricks around, which would take a page to list. I have had long discussion with one editor on triple point of carbon (graphite side, not diamond one). There were decades of research on that, and the values are still uncertain to about 500 degrees, with heated debates on how the experiment should be conducted and interpreted. It is just hard to believe that one article on diamond would set things for sure. I never bet, but anticipate comments to Nature on this soon. Materialscientist (talk) 04:21, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

  I just posted a note at WP:ERRORS and can email you the article in question if you wish. Regards. Materialscientist (talk) 23:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Can you please withdraw the GA nomination? The article is far from ready, and I plan on working on it in a few weeks. Theleftorium 15:54, 20 January 2010 (UTC)

Greetings, Nergaal. I noticed you are active in the Romanian WikiProject group, and I was wondering if you had the time if you might take a look at some of the articles I've been working on lately. I broke the massive article about the Cucuteni-Trypillian culture that I'd been working on for about a half-year into sub-articles, and have been working very hard to bring all of these articles up to a status where I would be proud of them. I'm including the template that is at the bottom of each of these articles to help you navigate to them, if you have the time and inclination to do so. I especially like the articles on the Economy, the Decline and End, and the House Burning. I'd appreciate any comments and/or advice (and of course praise). Thanks! Saukkomies ^talk 08:08, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

Hey man, noticed your edits on the List of awards and nominations received by House (TV series) page. Nice! I worked on the article a while back intending to take it to FLC but when I discovered all sources in the TCA section were dead I, though I wanted to continue working on it, sorta forgot about it. Your doing great work on wiki expanding near-FLs and no-way-near FLs, so if you need any help send me a message ;).--Music26/11 17:41, 23 January 2010 (UTC)

If you find the time, could you be so kind to review German-Japanese relations? It's a GA-nominee, too, and I'd really appreciate your opinion. --Gliese876 (talk) 23:09, 24 January 2010 (UTC)

is blocked from editing WP by CBM from 12 January for some unaddressed bugs, the owner seems to have no time for fixing the bot, thus we see bot contacting outside WP, but he can't write his results into the article. Materialscientist (talk) 03:04, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

The answer to your question is here. I need the bot running too, but am hesitant to unblock him as this would shift the responsibility for the bots running from CBM to me. Still mulling this .. Materialscientist (talk) 03:25, 25 January 2010 (UTC)

On 26 January 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Avatar (2009 film), which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

-- Did I get this right? If not, let me know! Best, HJ Mitchell | fancy a chat? 15:27, 26 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi. I saw that you just repackaged it from the Quietly Confident Quartet article and put this up at GAN, for the GT? I think it still needs more meat on the other teams, apart from Australia, and also while the US would have always won, the book only bothered to talk about teh US as they were far better, but West Germany and Canada also did well in swimming at the time and boycotted, and we would have to dig up the most recent World Championships to see how fast they were; probably faster than all the others as well. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 06:02, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

I had planned to dig up more details of the 1980 race in 2008, and got sidetracjed . In 1976, US did a 3:42 and in 1980, the others did 3:45; Also if I can find the results somewhere, in 1980, at the US Championships, I'm sure they did a time trial to prove that their quartet could swim faster than the non-boycott nations, and they were successful but I have to find that. If we are lucky we might be able to track down the individual times of the FRG and CAN swimmers and see what their paper times would be but it is not as essential as they would have been no match for the US. Also I got the results of the individual 100m races at Moscow and added the four legs together for all teh countries (except VN and Angola as they were clearly no hope) to work out which countries should have done well in theory, and I think that GDR, France, Holland and Hungary were also faster than Australia on paper, but I can't remember and don't know where my sheet is. GDR's freestyler won a indiv gold I think, and some of the others also had a few fourht/fifth guys that Australia didn't except for Evans. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 01:05, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, do you plann to bring Caesium to FA in the next few months? I would like to help, if this OK. I worked a little on the tellurium article and I would like to ask you if can have a look what to have to be done before GAN could be started. Thanks --Stone (talk) 20:50, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Another point is to get the Group 4 elements to be a good topic or even better. Would be a lot of points for the Cup.--Stone (talk) 20:55, 28 January 2010 (UTC)

Group 7 or group VIIA or group VIIB?

A stupd question from myself. Sometimes to switch on the brain before reading has some advantages! Period not group. --Stone (talk) 07:56, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

Template:PR-icon has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 06:39, 29 January 2010 (UTC)

The Harghita county was founded in 1968 and before 1968 no administrative division was called Harghita, but a mountain called "Harghita" always existed. If you take a look in maps that are older than 1968 you will have the answer of your question (1967, 1933, 1926, 1915, 1901, 1898, 1897, 1887, 1886, 1886, 1881, 1881 etc.) --Olahus (talk) 20:14, 31 January 2010 (UTC)

We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. We've had some shakeups regarding late entries, flag changes and early dropouts, but the competition is now established- there will be no more flag changes or new competitors. Congratulations to Sasata (submissions), our current leader, who, at the time of writing, has more listed points than Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions) (second and third place respectively) combined. A special well done also goes to Fetchcomms (submissions)- his artcle Jewel Box (St. Louis, Missouri) was the first content to score points in the competition.

Around half of competitors are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. 64 of the 149 current competitors will advance to round 2- if you currently have no points, do not worry, as over half of the current top 64 have under 50 points. Everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places in round 2! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! J Milburn, Garden, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:18, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

I'm sorry, but I don't understand this note you left for me on the PR page for Counties of Romania:- "In case you are not aware of wp:FT for your topic" Can you be clear what you are warning me about? I see no sign of an FT nomination. Brianboulton (talk) 18:36, 1 February 2010 (UTC)

Buna ziua, I made a little edit in Counties of Romania (another version of the Andrei Nacu's map). Your opinion ? Thank you ! --Spiridon 83.113.250.71 Manoliu (talk) 11:50, 2 February 2010 (UTC)

You're just adding linkspam. Intergrate them into the article as inline refs, or they'll be removed, per the policy. And lose the attitude. Lugnuts (talk) 19:42, 5 February 2010 (UTC)

See, that wasn't too hard to convert them into inline references. I can't believe someone who's contributed to so many FA's didn't know that... Lugnuts (talk) 10:55, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I have given more comments on some of the issues. Afro (Its More Than a Feeling) ^{- Afkatk} 09:16, 6 February 2010 (UTC)

I've left a comment as well as some more comments on the article itself. Afro (Its More Than a Feeling) ^{- Afkatk} 20:21, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

I have reviewed the Swimming at the 1980 Summer Olympics – Men's 4 x 100 metre medley relay article for GA status and left my comments on the talk page. Cheers, CP 00:03, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

So all of the articles have to be GA's. I thought that I could just leave out the 2 B-class articles from the nomination and when those are promoted, I'll add them as well. There was no where in the criteria that said that I have to nominate all of the articles. Just the ones that are GA class. Correct me if I'm wrong.--Coldplay Expért ^{Let's talk} 03:16, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Did some clean-up. You might recheck those refs, both reliability and title/publisher. igordebraga ≠ 03:09, 18 January 2010 (UTC) That's about a single concert, not the tour as a whole. igordebraga ≠ 17:33, 8 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, I quickly reverted your edit to the CERN article about the Romanian membership. It's not quite correct that they are a member, they became today a candidate for accession, membership will be in 5 years all going well. It's still showing the details on the CERN front page [www.cern.ch]. I think we need to reword it to show that membership will be in 5 years. Cheers ^Khukri 18:25, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

I've re-added Romania but showing it will become a member state in 2015 if that's OK with you, or tweak it as you see fit? ^Khukri 18:39, 11 February 2010 (UTC)

Your edit notes on the move of diphosphine to diphosphane indicated "correct name." As you can see at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Chemicals, editors just got finished with a similarly well-intentioned editor about a related "correct name" issue - lanthanoid (IUPAC) vs lanthanide (common usage). The Wikipedia:Manual of Style (chemistry) recommends phosphine. I should say that I prefer phosphane also, but folks in the WP-chem project, me included sometimes, get aggitated by drive by renaming.--Smokefoot (talk) 00:30, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

		What a Brilliant Idea Barnstar
		The "What a Brilliant Idea!" Barnstar should be awarded to a user who figures out an elegant solution to a particularly burdensome bottleneck or problem, or who identifies a means to improve Wikipedia in a profound way. This barnstar is awarded to Nergaal, for his wonderful idea for a unreferenced living people contest You are truly a benefit to the project, keep up the great work, and thank you! Okip (formerly Ikip) 22:56, 12 February 2010 (UTC)

On February 15, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mihai Viteazul (film), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 18:01, 15 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, thank for nominating Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom, the review to see if it meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria has started, and has been put on hold. Suggestions for improvement are at Talk:Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom/GA2, and are mainly to do with coverage and neutrality, and building the lead section. Elizabeth II of the United Kingdom is one of our most high profile and popular articles, attracting an average of over 11,000 readers every day. SilkTork *^YES! 12:32, 16 February 2010 (UTC)

I see you've been expanding the episode summaries over at South Park (season 13). Nice work! As you probably saw, I've started making some expansions to the page. I'm hoping to work it up and nominate it for GA in the next week or two. When the time comes, I can list you as a co-nominator if you like? If so, let me know if there are any specific sections you'd rather work on than have me work on, or you could always just do the episode expansions and copy edit the stuff I've added... — Hunter Kahn 03:19, 19 February 2010 (UTC)

• Hey Nergaal. I know I haven't heard back from you yet, but I had a question for you. Do you feel the episodes section of South Park (season 13) should be where it is now? Personally, I like it better with the episodes section right up top, like in Parks and Recreation (season 1) or Smallville (season 1). But if you think it should stay at the bottom, that's cool. Your thoughts? — Hunter Kahn 15:41, 20 February 2010 (UTC)
  • Sounds fine. The more I work on the article, the more I think it would better to place the episodes section up top, which I feel would make it easier to make references to those episodes elsewhere in the article. Copy-editing each other's prose sounds like an excellent idea. I'm also 100% in favor of bringing this to FAC at some point. However, when we're finished (or at least finished to the point of GA-readiness), I do want to nominate it for GA first, mainly because the Season 13 good topic will be ready very soon. (Also, in the interests of full disclosure, because I plan to list the GA as a WP:Wikicup nom for myself, as should you.) Thanks, and it's a pleasure to be working with you on this! — Hunter Kahn 20:35, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

• • • I've never found anything about a Cameron response. Like you, I was kind of expecting one. I'll look around for one though... — Hunter Kahn 21:52, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, so, I've incorporated most of the changes you suggested into the article. I added the Jonas Brothers to the music section, and added references to Avatar, WWE and 2010 to the cultural references. In fact, I found we now have enough to break "Writing" and "Cultural references" into two separate sections. I've looked around a bit and I do not believe there has been anything published about James Cameron's reaction to "Dances with Smurfs". I did not add a reference to peeing in pools (which I thought was too abstract a subject, and is already covered in the episode description) or to LHC, which I thought played only a minor role in the episode, and I tried to avoid those cases. For example, Randy dressed like Princess Leia, but if I added a Star Wars reference or a sentence on every passing reference in every episode, it would get bogged down. (However, if you strongly feel the LHC should be in here, feel free to add it yourself.)

Also, I wanted your feedback on this: I didn't add references to Sally or the gym teacher, because there are a number of characters that were in one episode only, and if start adding them, I'm not sure where we draw the line. If we add teh gym teacher and Sally, do I then add Tammy? Baby Fark McGeezax? Guleed the pirate? The Harley guys? Pi Pi? I added Katie and Katherine because they were such a big part of their episode, and it seems very likely they will be in future episodes. As far as the others, I figure we have two options: 1) Leave them out for now, and if they come back in future episodes, go back and add them in; or 2) Add maybe one long sentence with a few of them, for example, "The season also such characters as Tammy Warner, Kenny's sixth-grader girlfriend; Mr. Connors, the school's wrestling teacher; Sally, who gives Butters his first kiss..." If we do that though, we'd have to figure out who to list and who to keep out. Let me know what you think...

Well, I think we're almost ready for GAN. I'm going to look through my own stuff, maybe add a bit more to reception and give a glance at your episode summaries, and then I think we're good to go! Thanks for your help and your copy editing! — Hunter Kahn 03:07, 21 February 2010 (UTC)

On 20 February 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Copernicium, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Dumelow (talk) 11:46, 20 February 2010 (UTC)

I think the first season of South Park is ready for FT! As you were a participant, and will be listed as a co-nominator, I wanted to bring this discussion to your attention before I officially nominated it. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 00:39, 23 February 2010 (UTC)

I've given the whole article another glance through and fixed soem minor grammatical things, but otherwise I think we're ready to nominate it for GAN. Do you have any objection to my listing it now? — Hunter Kahn 15:52, 24 February 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal. I'm sorry, but I took a closer look at Caesium, and uncovered what I believe to be serious problems with the text. I have outlined examples of these at the discussion page, and have indicated there that I recommend you withdraw the FAC nomination until the entire article has been reviewed in terms of its reliance on the USGS source, possible plagiarism and paraphrasing problems, and improper citing of sources that editors haven't actually checked. I have made clear there (and repeat it here) that I am not saying you perpetrated these mistakes; but as nominator, you are regrettably going to be stuck with the consequences of them. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 03:51, 22 February 2010 (UTC)

Withdrawal seems like a silly choice for two reasons. First, this article will make it through FAC at some point. Thus, the issues brought up by you in the current FAC will have to be addressed at some point. Since we already have the issues being discussed on the FAC page, it makes more sense to continue the discussion there rather than going through the hassle of shifting the discussion elsewhere and then starting another FAC later. It is convenient for the most number of editors if we simply continue with the current FAC until it either passes or progress halts and it fails. Second, it seems that Stone and I have both jumped on board to try and help, and I'm sure the other members of WP:ELEMENTS would be willing to do so as well. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 04:12, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

OK, I'll keep an eye out, but will be more off- than on-line until 3 March. It looks like a big ask to me, but if there are several committed content editors, then it may work out OK. Regards, hamiltonstone (talk) 09:08, 25 February 2010 (UTC)

Since I hadn't heard back, I went ahead and nominated South Park (season 13) for GA. I think it's ready. Thanks again for all your help with that one! I think it's almost ready for FA already; maybe we can list it for peer review after the GAN passes! — Hunter Kahn 04:49, 27 February 2010 (UTC)

Round one is over, and round two has begun! Congratulations to the 64 contestants who have made it through, but well done and thank you to all contestants who took part in our first round. A special well done goes to Sasata (submissions), our round one winner (1010 points), and to Hunter Kahn (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions), who were second and third respectively (640 points/605 points). Sasata was awarded the most points for both good articles (300 points) and featured articles (600 points), and TonyTheTiger was awarded the most for featured topics (225 points), while Hunter Kahn claimed the most for good topics (70). Staxringold (submissions) claimed the most featured lists (240 points) and featured pictures (35 points), Geschichte (submissions) claimed the most for Did you know? entries (490 points), Jujutacular (submissions) claimed the most for featured sounds (70 points) and Candlewicke (submissions) claimed the most for In the news entries (40 points). No one claimed a featured portal or valued picture.

Credits awarded after the end of round one but before round two may be claimed in round two, but remember the rule that content must have been worked on in some significant way during 2010 by you for you to claim points. The groups for round two will be placed up shortly, and the submissions' pages will be blanked. This round will continue until 28 April, when the top two users from each group, as well as 16 wildcards, will progress to round three. Please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup; thank you to all doing this last round, and particularly to those helping at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, by email or on IRC. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17 Delivered by JCbot (talk) at 00:51, 1 March 2010 (UTC)

The FT passed! Congrats! — Hunter Kahn 04:35, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

Although there are no official bonus points for the WP:Wikicup, I'd like to award you with 20 honorary bonus points for Round 1. I thank and congratulate you for your fantastic work on Caesium, which receives well over 1000 page views per day. While you could have done an article on an easy topic, you chose a more difficult, important, popular article that will be a great benefit to many more Wikipedia readers. Keep up the nice work! Reywas92^Talk 23:06, 7 March 2010 (UTC)

I was going to do this GA review, but after looking through the article I've decided against it, mainly because the article is too long and needs to be split IMO. It's over 400 kB in total with 101 kB of readable prose, outside the limits recommended by WP:Article size. Take a look at the series of articles on Samuel Johnson if you need some ideas on how to go about splitting the article up. I think it's quite possible that the article could be failed at GAN in its present form for not meeting criterion 1b, but I'll leave that for someone else to decide. --Malleus Fatuorum 14:51, 10 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey mate. I listed moon for FAR here. I thought you might like to know since you were involved with the Solar System FT and there doesn't seem to be much progress at the FAR. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 16:21, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Hey, just so you know, South Park (season 13) has passed at the GAN, so I've nominated the season for GTC!. I've also nominated the season 13 article for a peer review, and then place to pursue an FAC after that. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 04:35, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

We're half way through round two, and everything is running smoothly. Hunter Kahn (submissions) leads overall with 650 points this round, and heads pool B. TonyTheTiger (submissions) currently leads pool C, dubbed the "Group of Death", which has a only a single contestant yet to score this round (the fewest of any group), as well five contestants over 100 points (the most). With a month still to go, as well as 16 wildcard places, everything is still to play for. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Although unrelated to the WikiCup, April sees a Good Article Nominations backlog elimination drive, formulated as a friendly competition with small awards, as the Cup is. Several WikiCup contestants and judges have already signed up, but regular reviewers and those who hope to do more reviewing are more than welcome to join at the drive page. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox, iMatthew and The ed17

Delivered by JCbot (talk) 22:19, 31 March 2010 (UTC)

Please see talk section of Romania in the Early Middle Ages for the recently completed GA Review. Thanks. Chris (talk) 15:16, 9 April 2010 (UTC)

Do you plan on fixing the edit suggestions for thie review pn GA? Please advise. Chris (talk) 22:42, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nergaal. So, I'm planning to nominate South Park (season 13) for FAC in a few days, after I do a few more finishing touches. Since you were involved in the plot summaries and other aspects, do you want to be listed as a co-nominator? Let me know. Also, I wanted to let you know that in the even you are a co-nom, I will be away for a month starting on May 8. I will be checking in on Wikipedia from time to time and think I can respond to review comments fairly swiftly, but if you can keep a particularly close eye on the FAC after that time, it'd be appreciate. Anyway, let me know either way ASAP because I will have it nominated in a few days. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 06:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal you had no edits since mid of February has anything happened? --Stone (talk) 20:02, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

With the Simpsons WikiProject having reached it's goal of getting every single article about a season 1-9 episode, 203 in total, of The Simpsons to GA status. With that accomplished, I am trying to thank every member (and non-member) who was involved in the effort in some way.

		The Simpsons (Annoyed Grunt)-star
		WP:DOH has reached its long-time goal of getting every classic era episode, 203 in total, to GA. You earned this for helping keep the drive organized, and contributing to many different articles. -- Scorpion0422 II (Talk) 00:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

I noticed that you changed "supporting tours" to "early tours" in List of Slipknot concert tours a while back. I think this sounds better, but I was wondering, what does it mean, specifically speaking... CrowzRSA ^{21:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)}

Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to Hunter Kahn (submissions), our clear overall round winner, and to ThinkBlue (submissions) and Arsenikk (submissions), who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants Stone (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 17:37, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:Helium-II-creep.svg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:22, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on File:HeTube.jpg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section I2 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because it is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{hangon}} to the top of the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

We are half way through round 3, with a little under a month to go. The current overall leader is Sasata (submissions), who has 570 points. He leads pool C. Pools A, B and D are led by Hunter Kahn (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and White Shadows (submissions) respectively. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Two of last year's final 8, Theleftorium (submissions) and Scorpion0422 (submissions), have dropped out of the competition, saying they would rather their place went to someone who will have more time on their hands than them next round. On a related note, a special thank you goes to White Shadows (submissions) for his help behind the scenes once again. There is currently a problem with the poster, perhaps caused by the new skin- take a look at this discussion and see if you can help. The competition has continued to tick over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. Good luck to all! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 20:51, 31 May 2010 (UTC)

We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by Sasata (submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants ( Sasata (submissions), Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) and TonyTheTiger (submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by Casliber (submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to Hunter Kahn (submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:43, 31 July 2010 (UTC)

Great to see you back! I turned up to tell you about some QCQ FACs but you weren't there, but now Mark Tonelli is up. How are you? YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 02:28, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

I have replied to your comment at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/2009–10 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball team/archive1--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 19:15, 19 August 2010 (UTC)

Hey, per your post Wikipedia_talk:Doh#Topic_drives.3F, do you want to help me with either 10-12 or THOH? CTJF83 chat 19:12, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your latest note. I fully agree with you that the article Origin of the Romanians needs a peer review. I would be grateful if you adviced me how it works. Borsoka (talk) 04:43, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, I've responded to your strong oppose vote on my FLC here. I hope you will check it soon. I've also made a proposal right at the bottom of the discussion, do see if you agree with it. Thank you. Regards, ANGCHENRUI ^Talk♨ 14:23, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

I've followed-up on your comments, do take a look again. Added some colours to the article, though limited them to only one column in the table. Cheers, ANGCHENRUI ^Talk♨ 07:39, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, you raised two issues in my FLC. They've been addressed, so you can strike them out if the issues no longer stand? Cheers, ANGCHENRUI ^Talk♨

It is good that you are back and I hope you enjoy it! It is sad that you missed a lot of fun with the Wikicup. I hope we can come up with some nice ideas fr the future of the elements project. I hope you know that I appreciate your work. --Stone (talk) 14:37, 30 August 2010 (UTC)

We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.

• Pool A's winner was Sturmvogel_66 (submissions). Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
• Pool B's winner was Casliber (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
• Pool A's close second was Sasata (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
• Pool B's close second was ThinkBlue (submissions). Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
• The first wildcard was TonyTheTiger (submissions). Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
• The second wildcard was White Shadows (submissions). Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
• The third wildcard was Staxringold (submissions). Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
• The fourth wildcard was William S. Saturn (submissions). Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. Geschichte (submissions) only just missed out on a place in the final eight. Resolute (submissions) was not far behind. Candlewicke (submissions) was awarded top points for in the news this round. Gary King (submissions) contributed a variety of did you know articles. Suomi Finland 2009 (submissions) said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. Arsenikk (submissions) did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to Ian Rose (submissions), who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to Stone (submissions) for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:13, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Balaur boondoc.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. Eeekster (talk) 02:57, 1 September 2010 (UTC)

Nergaal, would you mind swinging back by Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Olympic medalists in volleyball/archive1 when you get a chance? Thanks. Courcelles 19:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Balaur boondoc.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

• I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
• I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
• If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
• To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
• If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.

Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:41, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

I am really impressed at the list you have created on there. Good job. DrNegative (talk) 00:38, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

Magog the Ogre (talk) 11:15, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

A discussion has begun about whether the article Tomahawk Blues Band, which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Tomahawk Blues Band (2nd nomination) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Saskiart (talk) 14:59, 13 September 2010 (UTC)

Category:Sport societies in Romania, which you created, has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the Categories for discussion page. Thank you. Nergaal (talk) 18:44, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

Needs a revisit when you get the chance. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 14:17, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 19:45, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

I have responded to your recent comment. Gage (talk) 23:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Could you please respond to my most recent comment? Gage (talk) 19:04, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Your concerns have been addressed. Gage (talk) 21:29, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

I have replied to you on Talk:Slipknot discography regarding that article. As for the tours, it's quite hard to find that information now. It appears that there really aren't many reliable sources around that can confirm or dismiss information regardign their previous torus and I don't know what to suggest when it comes to that. --REZTER ^TALK ø 15:40, 19 September 2010 (UTC)

The issue of such hatnotes has been extensively debated, and their use found unnecessary and divisive. See one example of a previous discussion here, among several others. Please seek consensus at Talk Pages before re-application. RashersTierney (talk) 08:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Whoa, could I ask you to undo your page moves? With that many edits under your belt you should know that it's not considered good manners at best to just move a page like that. "Removing confusion" is hardly an adequate description of why exactly and on what basis and in particular with Romano-Serbian languages you've increased confusion because Serbian Romani language suggests it is a Romani language in Serbia, which it isn't. It's a language spoken by Roma but based on Serbian. Please undo the moves to Hellenoromani language and Romano-Serbian languages and discuss, if you still want to move them. Akerbeltz (talk) 11:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello,

Well, the subject if the crowd ready to walk 350 km to Delhi. It is so obvious that you can't have the speaker's face and the public at the same time. Regards, Yann (talk) 08:30, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

This is just a recommendation, so feel free to ignore it, but I'd encourage you to write out "support" if that's what you mean, rather than putting a plus sign. For instance, I'm not really sure whether you mean to indicate a weak kind of support with it, or a full support? We did have a discussion a while back after which the "support" and "oppose" icons stopped being used on FPC, in contrast with Commons. The plus symbol reminded me of that. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 10:17, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

	Thanks again for your support and comments. List of longest streams of Oregon made featured list today. Finetooth (talk) 02:57, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

I request you to come back to the nomination and review your concerns. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:46, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Adrian (talk) 18:29, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Adrian (talk) 08:24, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Adrian (talk) 09:05, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nergaal, thanks for your comments on the formula one polesitters flc, they were very useful. I have now addressed you comments, so when you have some spare time could you please revisit, it would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, NapHit (talk) 18:40, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Since you created a bunch of books recently, I thought you might be interested in this. Basically, this would give you access to the PediaPress renderer used to print books and should allow you to review book as they would be printed (minus covers). If you find errors and problems, please report them at Help:Books/Feedback.

Headbomb {talk / contribs / physics / books} 19:55, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the quickfail, I am curious as to whether you are aware of any publicly available content for the short sections that was omitted. If not, the proper suggestion would be to merge the short sections together and not fail. This is a very marginally notable subject given that lacrosse is on the low end of the professional sports importance spectrum. Significant secondary sources are hard to come by and thus, the short sections that you see are the result. Thus, in terms of WP:WIAGA an article may be completely compliant with an unusually short amount of content.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:33, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

In other words, your analysis is not whether the sections are short, but whether they are a comprehensive summary of available secondary sources. If there are no substantial secondary sources omitted, you should reconsider your quickfail before I take this to GAR due to an invalid fail.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:51, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

I did not get a chance to expand upon what would be considered missing. Judging by your FAs on your main page you do not focus on sports bios. I have done a dozens of sports bio GAs. Basically, a comprehensive professional career summary includes major records, all-star and award summaries, important playoff performances, notable statistical accomplishments, significant injuries affecting performance, notable transactions and extraordinary single-game performances. Unfortunately, I don't think anything is missing from Prager's article. His personal section could include many things that you might find in a slightly more notable individual, but that you will not likely find for him. You should reconsider your evaluation, but I will go straight to GAR if you don't respond by 0:00 UTC 9/27 (about 48 hours).--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:36, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

FYI--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:59, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Nergaal. Could you take a look at this list and check if your comments were addressed? This FLC needs reviews to reach the necessary quorum. Thank you. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:34, 25 September 2010 (UTC)

The article Cucuteni-Trypillian culture you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Cucuteni-Trypillian culture for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:23, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. Nergaal (talk) 00:38, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for nominating the article, Nergaal. I was honestly surprised, but I'm glad you did it because the reviewer gave us some very helpful advice on specifically what is important to work on now. I'll be doing what I can to improve the main article first, and then follow up with work on the subarticles later - this will of course take quite a bit of time, but that's okay, we're in no hurry (I think) to get this done immediately. --Saukkomies ^talk 00:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Balaur (dinosaur) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Wilhelmina Will (talk) 02:41, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will be glad to solve any issues. Nergaal (talk) 02:44, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

As a matter of fact, I have found two issues in the article. I won't be able to come back for a while, but I'll come back and continue the review as soon as I can. Good luck! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 03:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations on the article's promotion! Might I treat you to dinner over the occasion?:

Cheers! Wilhelmina Will (talk) 04:50, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Nergaal (talk) 04:52, 27 September 2010 (UTC)

What was wrong with them? Your change to the chemical element article quality picture was in my watchlist. --Chemicalinterest (talk) 15:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I've replied YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)

The others want it kept at WT:CRIC YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 01:28, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:61 Pm 02 large.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images 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 "file" 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 "File" from the dropdown box. Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Hammersoft (talk) 20:31, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

I have responded to your comment here. ResMar 00:31, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

You are an experienced enough contributor to not try to reduce discussion at ITN/C to voting figures and post support/oppose comments without any reason at all, or with malicious comment towards the field of the subject rather than consideration of whether the proposal meets inclusion criteria. Kevin McE (talk) 18:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey. Just letting you know I responded to both your FT coordinator note as well as your concerns at the White Sox FLC. Also adding in the significance note int he other opening day lists so that there's no problems with that in the future. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 23:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. TonyTheTiger (submissions) leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by Sasata (submissions) with 1175 points. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:07, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Reference is table 2 in the discovery paper [1], which is a fit that assumes circular orbits for all the planets. This paper is referenced in the updated description. Note that the 6-planet fit is NOT improved by introducing orbital eccentricity, therefore it seems likely that the previously-reported eccentricities for planets c and d were actually due to the unmodelled effects of the additional planets. You CANNOT use the eccentricities for the 4-planet fit in the 6-planet model. Icalanise (talk) 23:40, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Regarding the use of 1999 as the epoch, this is the epoch given in the paper. Since the true masses of the planets are unknown, it does not seem to me to be worth performing a numerical integration forwards to 2010. Icalanise (talk) 23:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Hey, hope I wasn't too hard on your FAC. Like I said, I liked chemistry back in high school, so I know a little bit. It was a good read all the way through.

BTW, is there any chance you could give a look on an FAC of mine? If you're too busy, it's no worry. --Hurricanehink (talk) 03:00, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Sorry, bit of a mind-slip. I've now commented on the topic proposal. Thanks for proposing it!

 M.F.B.T.  ^{Yes, Minister?} 19:23, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

On 3 October 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article Sébastien Loeb, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Mkativerata (talk) 23:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)

You asked about the picture being better without the fish. You now have the option. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 22:18, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, I've removed this FLC nom from the list for now. Please note that the FLC instructions say "Users should not add a second FL nomination until the first has gained substantial support and reviewers' concerns have been substantially addressed." Feel free to re-submit when the Romanian counties list is closed or receives a couple of supports. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:29, 5 October 2010 (UTC)

you forgott you complete signum. --Alchemist-hp (talk) 15:50, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Please revisit Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Chicago Michigan Avenue 1911.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

replied again YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 08:31, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

... and again a revert here?!? --Alchemist-hp (talk) 21:20, 9 October 2010 (UTC)

Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 02:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

I've replied to your comment. Buggie111 (talk) 16:53, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

I've asked a question relating to the Monarch's. Buggie111 (talk) 17:15, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Have you seen my proposal at the FLC page? Cheers. Parutakupiu (talk) 22:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for the interest in the Churchill War Rooms. Some of the citation tags you added can be fixed by adding additional references to sources already cited, but the second paragraph, 'Wartime use' requires rewriting entirely. If you're not watching that article, I'll let you know when it might be ready for nomination. Thanks again.--IxK85 (talk) 16:22, 26 September 2010 (UTC)

Hello again. I've recently rewritten the paragraph above; do you think it's ready for GA nomination? Best regards. IxK85 (talk) 17:10, 12 October 2010 (UTC)

User:Nergaal has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Nergaal's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Nergaal! Peace, Rlevse 00:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC) A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

For a user ribbon you can use, see

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:04, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for uploading File:Chlorine liquid in an ampoule-crop.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 file. If you know this information, then you can add a copyright tag to the image description page.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their license and tagged them, too. You can find a list of files you have created in your upload log.

If you have any questions, please feel free to ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thanks again for your cooperation. mickiτ 19:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)

You might have done well to look around further before complaining about the MilHist GAN backlog drive. [2] covers the genesis of the drive after WP:WPGA declined to conduct one of their own to coincide with the finale of the Cup. I knew that I'd never win on DYKs, FAs and FLs so I focused on GAs and GTCs from the very beginning. I was always worried about reviews in a timely manner, but there was always the WikiCup/Review page as a backstop if the regular review process wasn't enough. But I'd likely overload that with the quantities that I knew I'd have done by then. After seeing the WP:WPGA drive in April I always hoped that they'd schedule another in October as that would take care of all of my worries about reviewers, but I had to figure out something else when they decided not to. So why not a MilHist drive? You really might want to look closely at Sasata's little reviewer cabal, if you think that I'm up to no good. Reviews on the same day as submission? How often does that happen on the GAN page? You may not have noticed that I'll get points only once for articles in a GT so it doesn't matter if they're in a class-specific topic or a larger one. A judge ruled against my initial belief that I could double dip. I can understand our disagreement over the Courageous-class GTC, although I think that you're wrong, but I'm having a hard time understanding your petty obstructionism in the British BC übertopic unless you think that I'm trying to get extra points for having the same articles in two GTs and are trying to foil my nefarious plans by any means possible. The subtopic version of the British battlecruiser topic is ideal, as far as I'm concerned, because it keeps two GTs intact, Courageous-class and Indefatigable-class, each with one article outside the British BC topic, that I believe should remain independent. The German BC FT that you referenced is slightly more than half the size of the British equivalent and consists mostly of single articles, whereas the British GTC has five subtopics with 3-5 articles in each. You seem oddly concerned, from my POV, about the need to consolidate as many GTs as possible, if the bulk of the articles belong in a larger GT, whereas I believe that the presence of even a single article that doesn't fit into a larger GT means that the smaller GT should remain independent. Can you explain your reasoning, please? Fundamentally I believe that your concerns are misplaced. The Cup is about content creation done to a standard and that's something that everybody's done reasonably well, I think. Participants have certainly stressed the various evaluation systems, but some of us have undertaken steps to mitigate the burden, unlike, say, TTT whose GANs still sit in an undigested lump in the Sports section. The MilHist drive has actually reduced the backlog by 20-30 articles in addition to all of my submissions in just two weeks, to the benefit of the project and all the nominators, including myself. And I expect we'll run it again the next time our backlog get above 40 or so articles.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:13, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Please indicate precisely where your claimed consensus occurred at Talk:Romani people for inclusion of these controversial hatnotes that you have again added unilaterally. As you are well aware, your previous addition of this disclaimer to several Romani-related articles resulted in their immediate removal, which demonstrates very clearly that there is no such consensus for inclusion. If you want to discuss this issue further, I suggest you take it to Talk:Romani people or another suitable centralised forum. RashersTierney (talk) 23:32, 16 October 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:PET-MIPS-anim.gif, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:01, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

I think you ment to bold your support here, Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Haitian Presidential Palace in 2010 Earthquake ]]. Spongie555 (talk) 05:13, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Someone has done editting on the nomination if you would like to see. Spongie555 (talk) 03:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

On 21 October 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article UDFy-38135539, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Mkativerata (talk) 20:48, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, as a regular at FPC, I wonder whether you would accept our invitation to judge the Choice of the week from the newly promoted FPs in next week's edition of The Signpost. It would mean writing a short para, Saturday or early Sunday, specifying your choice and the technical or other reasons for it.

Please let me know if this would be possible.

Cheers Tony (talk) 06:02, 20 October 2010 (UTC)

Well, you looked to be making fairly discerning comments through the list for October. I'm happy for you to do so next weekend if you're still agreeable. Examples:

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-10-18/Features_and_admins#Featured pictures

Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2010-10-11/Features_and_admins#Featured pictures Tony (talk) 17:15, 20 October 2010 (UTC)∂

OK, it's ready for you. Thx. Tony (talk) 02:45, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Oh nice. In retrospect, I guess I was hoping you'd choose that one. Tony (talk) 04:12, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Just letting you know in case that a better option can be found. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 21:17, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

The article Rutherfordium you nominated as a good article has failed ; see Talk:Rutherfordium for reasons why the nomination failed. If or when these points have been taken care of, you may apply for a new nomination of said article. If you oppose this decision, you may ask for a reassessment. Jezhotwells (talk) 23:21, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Just making sure that you've seen this discussion and had a chance to comment before I institute the currently f(l)avoured solution. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 06:56, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

Make sure you upload it in the place where the original resides - Commons in this case. I've made the move for you this time. It's also a good idea to copy the description from the original version. I did that for you, too. Should all be fixed as soon as an admin deletes the en copy. Cheers, Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 17:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

It's suspended now. I'll update the template when it's closed again (if I'm the closer). Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 08:00, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I just noticed that this nomination is still open. Feel free to re-transclude to WP:FLC it now. Cheers (and thanks for you recent reviews), Dabomb87 (talk) 22:19, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to TonyTheTiger (submissions), with 2260, and third to Casliber (submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows (submissions), William S. Saturn (submissions), Staxringold (submissions) and ThinkBlue (submissions). Also, congratulations to Sasata (submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is Casliber (submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Staxringold (submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular (submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is TonyTheTiger (submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Candlewicke (submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:09, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

		The WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation
		Awarded to Nergaal, for participation in the 2010 WikiCup. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 08:58, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nergaal. Just so you know, I've nominated South Park (season 13) for FA. Since we both worked on that article extensively back in the day, I listed you as a co-nominator. If you object to that for any reason, feel free to remove yourself as co-nom on the FAC page. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 01:52, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I see you withdrew the nom. I just wanted to emphasize that I would have loved to support the video, and I agree with you wholeheartedly about the high EV and just sheer coolness of the subject. I just feel like we can do much better than that particular clip, and will gladly support another feature nom. Hey, now that the WikiCup is over, you might be able to track one down? Good hunting! bahamut0013^words_deeds 16:32, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Child with Smallpox Bangladesh.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

As a regular at FLC, I'd like to draw your attention to ongoing discussion here about changes to the format of tables which will affect all existing FLs and all current and future FLCs. Your input would be welcome. Thanks for your contributions so far! The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

I have brought up a few more issues, and I've made 2 minor edits to the article itself. I think the list is near enough ready to be promoted. Afro (Talk) 22:02, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

I've left some follow up questions regarding this, a more indepth look at the references at the very least. Afro (Talk) 10:57, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

It's been 5 days, and it seems like you haven't attempted to address my comments, I would like to remind you on November 4, I left some comments on the FLC, considering the nomination is gone on a month I would like to get these issues sorted out ASAP. Afro (Talk) 08:04, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Jokulsarlon Panorama.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Maedin\talk 09:21, 6 November 2010 (UTC)

There are multiple angles of the same show (e.g., [3][4]) that would at least provide variety. Few people I've asked to relicense on Flickr have turned me down. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 05:19, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nergaal. Sorry, but I do not have a copy of that particular book. If I can be of any other assistance with the article, though, please let me know. Would love to see it get to FA status, but I don't want to interfere with your work if you want to handle it... — Hunter Kahn 02:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)

Hey, I saw your above post on Hunter's page...I can get the Blame Canada book from a local library, not the other one though. CTJF83 chat 01:44, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Not at all. CTJF83 chat 02:00, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

if you see anything else you need, let me know...if you do a search, after it click on location on the right and change to all. CTJF83 chat 02:03, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Ok, the book finally came to the library, and I have it now...what exactly would you like me to add to Season 1? CTJF83 chat 22:26, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, I will definitely do that Tuesday after work. I'd do it now, but have a terrible sinus headache, if you want anything else added, let me know. CTJF83 chat 03:13, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Yikes, hate to be the bearer of bad news...but it lists very few ratings, just the first episode, and then milestones...the only one that you need, that the book has is "Cartman's Mom Is a Dirty Slut" 8.2 rating, 6.2 million viewers....sorry :( CTJF83 chat 02:19, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hi, just a quick reminder to please use an edit summary when you propose an article for deletion as you forgot to when you PRODded Marius Nedelcu. Thanks, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on November 29, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 29, 2010. If you think that it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 04:37, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Spirobranchus giganteus (Red and white christmas tree worm).jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 06:28, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lutheran Cathedral Helsinki edit.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Jujutacular talk 18:03, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Chlorine liquid in an ampoule.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 20:23, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Can you please complete your nominations here, here, here, here and here? Thanks. Papa Lima Whiskey (talk) 11:51, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

		The Original Barnstar
		Too often great editors like you are overlooked and not given the credit deserved for all their great contributions. So I am awarding you this barnstar to let you know I greatly appreciate all you do for Wikipedia, and please keep up the outstanding work!! CTJF83 chat 03:20, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I have began to review the article in depth, almost as it was a FAC, since I feel it is in very good shape. I want to know if you plan to take the article to FAC and want a profound review of the whole article, or you are more interested in a fast GA evaluation. Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 07:51, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Arnoglossus laterna larva.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:10, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

I have expanded americium and curium and will expand berkelium soon, all for DYK. Writing was quick in all cases, thus a copyedit would be nearly mandatory for GAN (featuring a DYK often results in a partial copyedit, but this has not happened yet). Cheers. Materialscientist (talk) 04:50, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Hey mate, it seems that by some strange magic, your request for a peer review of Rutherfordium has been granted. Just letting you know in case you hadn't noticed. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 16:26, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Cadmium-crystal bar.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:22, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Manganese electrolytic and 1cm3 cube.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 04:24, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

{{subst:promotedFPC}}

My apologies Nergaal, it seems that my promotion of this image was in error, and I have undone it. Regards, Jujutacular ^talk 06:21, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

This comment is an antisemitic comment. Stop making such comments.--Mbz1 (talk) 17:28, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Just done a GA review there - only significant issue is the state of the citations: see Talk:Americium/GA1. Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 00:41, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Congratulations on a wonderful main page article Caesium. Since you are the majority contributor, just wanted to tell you that I enjoyed reading it very much! Great work and please keep up the good work! AshLin (talk) 07:36, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Schwarze Habichtsfliege Dioctria atricapilla.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Maedin\talk 07:26, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

It might not have been your intention, but your recent edit removed content from United States diplomatic cables leak. When removing content, please specify a reason in the edit summary and discuss edits that are likely to be controversial on the article's talk page. If this was a mistake, don't worry; the content has been restored, as you can see from the page history. Thank you. I wasn't sure about putting such a template on an established user's talk page but such a blatant removal really must be explained... «CharlieEchoTango» 07:05, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi. As you just participated in discussions on a closely related topic (also a current AfD re a Jewish list), which may raise some of the same issues, I'm simply mentioning that the following are currently ongoing: AfDs re lists of Jewish Nobel laureates, entertainers, inventors, actors, cartoonists, and heavy metal musicians. Best.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Beautiful Demoiselle Calopteryx virgo.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Jujutacular talk 15:44, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Anas platyrhynchos male female quadrat.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Maedin\talk 19:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Image: self-luminous paint which contains promethium Hello Nergaal, do you asked the sample owner about the properties of this sample? Do you know Max? I do it. This sample ist the same how luminous. It isn't metallic Pm! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 01:45, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Hello Nergaal, I know the new image File:61_Pm_02_large.jpg too. It is still the same a lot of "self-luminous paint powder which contains promethium". It isn't Pm metal. It isn't possible to have a lot of Pm metal powder. It would melt and glow immediately! --Alchemist-hp (talk) 11:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Template:Administrative levels of Romania sidebar has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Bsherr (talk) 18:30, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

As co-nominator, I wanted to ask your opinion. So I proposed that NFRC idea regarding the South Park (season 13) infobox image with the hopes of coming to a reasonable compromise, but with Fasach not going for it, and with more and more votes in favor of the inclusion of the image, I'm now worried that the compromise proposal is too unorthodox and may sink the nomination. I'm wondering if we're better off just scrapping it, adding back the image and taking our chances. (If we do that, I'll inform Fasach and David Fuchs so they can put back their oppose votes if they want, as it's only fair.) What do you think? (Let me know ASAP, as we may be running out of time.) — Hunter Kahn 15:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• Never mind, I've gone ahead and done it. I didn't want to wait because this FAC has already been out there for about a month, so I wanted to get this done before the FA delegate acted. I also figured you would approve, since you have argued in favor of the image all along. Based on the mixed response from the two sole objectors to the image, my compromise idea seemed like the wrong path, so I think we're best off just going with the image, which seems to have overwhelming support, and let the chips fall where they may with the FA delegate. If you have a problem with this at all, let me know. — Hunter Kahn 18:09, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on December 16, 2010. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 16, 2010. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article director, Raul654 (talk · contribs). If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbh®tch^{Talk ©} Happy Holidays 20:21, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi, I saw that you collaborated on articles related to Dacia and thought this could be of interest: WikiProject Dacia is looking for supporters, editors and collaborators for creating and better organizing information in articles related to Dacia and the history of Daco-Getae. If interested, PLEASE provide your support on the proposal page. Thanks!!--Codrinb (talk) 03:20, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi Nergaal, can you have a lok on the Rubidium article? I think I improved it to B-Class. Is there more to do? Thanks! --Stone (talk) 22:01, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I will try to go back, but there are other elements also in need of help. --Stone (talk) 13:43, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Hello! Would you be interested in forming WikiProject Jupiter? If so, please show your support by clicking on the link above!--Novus Orator 04:51, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

- (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 23:25, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Again, talkback. Im not sure if you're watching the page or not. - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 02:04, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Hey Nergaal. Well, it looks like the South Park (season 13) FAC failed over the infobox image. I checked in with the FA delegate about whether it would be acceptable to take it over to NFCR and he recommended against it since the FAC standards are so much more stringent, and a consensus at NFCR would not necessarily carry over. I agree with him, so I think unfortunately, if we want this thing to get to FA, we have to drop the image. The delegate said if we dropped the image, he wouldn't mind if we renominate right away, so I was going to go ahead and do it, but wanted to check with you first. Are you cool with being relisted as co-nom again if I drop the image? — Hunter Kahn 03:06, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I've responded to your comments, we don't need to have a seperate article for Premier seeing that we have three of them already: Council of People's Commissars, Council of Ministers (Soviet Union) and the Cabinet of Ministers of the USSR. There is really no need. --TIAYN (talk) 09:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I've responded to your comments, the intro has now been revised. I believe the copyedit problem is still an issue, but I will get another editor to look at it. --TIAYN (talk) 10:10, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Is the new material good enough? If not, i will postpone the copyedit request! --TIAYN (talk) 22:33, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Can you please reply? I can't improve the article if you don't tell me what needs improvement! --TIAYN (talk) 09:32, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Merry Christmas

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Extra999 (talk) at 04:07, 21 December 2010 (UTC).

Wishing you a very Merry Christmas & Happy New Year! Wishing you all the very best for the season. Thanks for all your help and support this year. Merry Christmas and may Santa be good to you! – SMasters (talk) 04:02, 24 December 2010 (UTC) Click to play!

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lutetium sublimed dendritic and 1cm3 cube.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:54, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Thulium sublimed dendritic and 1cm3 cube.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 05:56, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Can you clarify your vote at this nomination? Do you have a preference for either version? Thanks. Makeemlighter (talk) 10:42, 27 December 2010 (UTC)

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, File:Lead electrolytic and 1cm3 cube.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 03:20, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

Well, my friend, I'm starting to think FA is just not in this article, at least for now. lol. I'm seriously contemplating just withdrawing the FAC and pulling the plug on the whole thing, and maybe revisiting it in a few months when things cool down. It's frustrating, as nobody seems to be objecting to (or even addressing) the article itself. I think the image should stay too, but not if it's going to hold up the FAC. But now we not only have people who insist on restoring it despite my requests not to, but people basically promising edit wars if anyone dares remove it, which brings the article's stability into question. I'm starting to think allowing this FAC to continue will only fan the flames and make it harder if we ever try to bring it to FAC again in the future. So what do you think, should we withdraw? — Hunter Kahn 17:59, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

• Never mind. Had a moment of weakness, but I'm feeling better. :D Will follow through with this... — Hunter Kahn 15:43, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll help you maintain your page, but we're tracking different things I think, I'm not caring about whats in the infobox just if we have a FP of it... Mind if I more liberally relabel things as "could possibly be FP"'s since I have a lot of experience with FPC process... much of what you have labeled doesn't have a chance, or has even failed. — raekyt 15:00, 31 December 2010 (UTC)