User talk:ProgrammingGeek/Archive 4

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

Archive 6

→

Archive 8

"Draft:Sinfonia da Camera" review

Hi, Thanks for the quick response to our "Resubmit" request for "Draft:Sinfonia da Camera". And thanks for saying that it is almost ready to be accepted. Could you clarify your objection to the wording "simply a joy to hear"? This is the last few words of a direct quote from reference 8. The reason I quoted from this particular reference, rather than leaving it to the Wikipedia reader to simply go to the reference, is because this reference is hidden behind a paywall. Wagneroperafan and I want to move this from "Draft:" to article soon, so I will simply take out the quote if you think that is necessary. However, before doing that I wanted to check with you, to see whether you noticed that this was a quotation from a source. Maybe you are saying that a quotation from a source should only be put into a Wikipedia article if the quotation comes from a url, e.g., not a book, and only if the url is freely available. Thanks. CWBoast (talk) 20:35, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey, @CWBoast:, what I meant was having the quote in the article is unnecessary, and a summary of reviews would be more encyclopedic. Thanks, ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 20:39, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

I removed the two "evaluative" quotes. What is the next step? Do I hit the "Resubmit" button again, or wait for a response from you? Thanks. CWBoast (talk) 21:01, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

looks good to me. Go ahead and resubmit. ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 21:18, 30 March 2017 (UTC)

Thank you. Sinfonia da Camera is now an article. I'm pleased. A request: Is there any way that you could make the "Your submission at Articles for creation: Sinfonia da Camera has been accepted" message which appeared on my Talk page also appear on the Talk page of Wagneroperafan? I'm sure Wagneroperafan would appreciate it -- since the process of creating this article has been a truely joint effort. Thanks CWBoast (talk) 03:29, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

@CWBoast:  Done ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 12:25, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

One last question: In your opinion, would it be appropriate to display the quoted material (which I removed from the article) in the ref itself, i.e., as "|quote=...". In other words, was it the presence of the quoted material in the body of the article itself that you found to be inappropriate? CWBoast (talk) 15:48, 31 March 2017 (UTC)

Pending response from you, I put the quotes in the refs themselves. Still interested in your opinion. Thanks CWBoast (talk) 03:08, 4 April 2017 (UTC)

Your GA reviewing

I have noticed, and am very concerned, that you are taking very substantial articles to GA review with no prior experience evident. For instance, your review of History of agriculture is practically non-existent.. an article that is well over 80kb in size and one where I found many occurences of dead references. I have now noticed you have chosen to GA review iOS 10.. again, another article vast in size. I would strongly urge you to either get a 2nd and/or 3rd opinion on your current review, or consider instead taking a much smaller article, then similarly asking the community to assess your own assessment so you can better understand the criteria. Whilst I don't want to discourage new GA reviewers, equally we can't have people passing articles without even touching the surface of what a "good article" represents. You may want to check my query at the GA talk page also and reply if you feel appropriate. Bungle ^{(talk • contribs)} 20:32, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

History of agriculture

Hi, in response to the above, I've listed and checked the dead links, fixing 8 problems. Please could you check the new links and verify that I've done what I've said on the Talk:History of agriculture/GA2 page - it'll save me and others a lot of trouble now we're where we are, I'd be most grateful. I've also run the Copyvio detector (in the GA toolbox at top right of that page; again, could you please check I did it correctly. It would also be a good idea if you could read through the article again, and let me know if anything isn't clearly worded. All the best, Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:52, 5 April 2017 (UTC)

Thought you might need this beer

Sorry if you felt piled-on with that GA Review stuff. GA Reviews (& the related featured article nominating process) can both be quite tricky. When I was doing the most-recent GA Cup I worked through a (very) few GA Reviews of monstrously-big articles...they sometimes felt like my own personal editing ultra-marathon. Anyway, thought you might need a beer. Cheers, Shearonink (talk) 17:32, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Thanks ProgrammingGeek ^talktome 17:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

No stated concern

How can you PROD an article with no stated concern? No one can address your concern if you don't state it. - Jmabel | Talk 17:00, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

db-move

I've gone ahead and deleted Manju Latha Kalanidhi, but for future reference, you should use {{db-move}} on the article itself if you're accepting a draft that already exists as a redirect. Primefac (talk) 21:18, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Request re: Articles for Creation Help Desk

Hello, ProgrammingGeek. I'm one of your fellow volunteers over at the Articles for Creation Help Desk. I'm writing to ask a small favor -- when responding to user questions, would you indent your responses? The indentations provide an easy visual clue as to which questions have already been answered. It's not a big deal, but it would be of some help nonetheless if we didn't have to read through a question only to see that it already had a response. Thanks. NewYorkActuary (talk) 18:48, 11 April 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ProgrammingGeek. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bots/Requests_for_approval/ProgrammingBot.
Message added 01:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Here is the policy. Jamesjpk (talk) 01:20, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, ProgrammingGeek. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Bot_requests.
Message added 01:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Jamesjpk (talk) 01:27, 13 April 2017 (UTC)

Waiting before slapping A7 and A9 on

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

for making a suggestion that's already been considered. Chris Troutman (talk) 21:01, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Volunteer Roll Call

This is a volunteer roll call sent to you on behalf of the current Dispute Resolution Noticeboard Coordinator, Robert McClenon, and is being sent to you because you have listed yourself as a volunteer at DRN. If you remain interested in helping at DRN and are willing to actively do so by taking at least one case (and seeing it through) or helping with administrative matters at least once per calendar month, please add your name to the roll call list. Those who do not add their name on the roll call list will be removed from the principal volunteer list after May 31, 2017 unless the DRN Coordinator chooses to retain their name for the best interest of DRN or the encyclopedia. Individuals whose names are removed after May 31, 2017, should feel free to re-add their names to the principal volunteer list, but are respectfully requested not to do so unless they are willing to take part at DRN at least one time per month as noted above. No one is going to be monitoring to see if you live up to that commitment, but we respectfully ask that you either live up to it or remove your name from the principal volunteer list.

Best regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 21:54, 27 April 2017 (UTC) This is an informational posting only and I am not watching this page; contact me on my user talk page if you wish to communicate with me about this.