User talk:Sadads/Archive April- May 2010

WikiProject Novels - Coordinator Election

Hello. To begin, every member of WikiProject Novels will be getting this message (the joy of macros) so if you wish to get in touch with me, please post a message on my talk page. I would encourage anyone who so wishes, to stand in the Coordinator Elections. If you wish to stand, please do so by 23:59pm, June 27. Voting will the continue to 23:59pm, July 21. Can everyone please check-out the Coordinator Elections page. Also, the collaboration of the month is The Tin Drum, so if you have any spare time, please check it out. And I apologise to the seven of you for whom this will be a repeat message. Regards, Alan16 (talk).

The WikiProject Novels Newsletter - July 2009

The July 2009 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. Alan16(talk)

GA Review of Quicksilver (novel)

Hi Sadads. I shall be undertaking the review of this article against the Good Article criteria, per its nomination for Good Article status. If you have any questions or concerns please don't hesitate to contact me. I have already had a read of the article and it looks good, so don't anticipate any problems. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 13:41, 3 April 2010 (UTC)

Peer Review

I am hoping to get an article i made up to FA status, to this end i have been looking over the ways to go about it and getting peer review seems like the first step. If you have time would you be so kind as to look over The Hockey Stick Illusion and point me in the right direction, thank you mark nutley (talk) 15:51, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sadads. You have new messages at PrincessofLlyr's talk page.
Message added 17:56, 6 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

PrincessofLlyr (talk) 01:17, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Sadads. You have new messages at Dtgriffith's talk page.
Message added 12:20, 8 April 2010 (UTC)). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Deletion discussion: Comparison between roman and han empires

Hello. You are invited to take part in the deletion discussion on the redirect Comparison between roman and han empires. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 01:52, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

FA review of Quicksilver novel

Sorry, I have been away for a few weeks - but am saddened to see how you got on with the FA review for this article. IMO I think the editors were a little overly critical of the prose of the article - a couple of points they singled out as not making sense made perfect sense to me. Had I been around I would've tried to have given you a bit of support - though it probably wouldn't have done much good. ✽ Juniper§ Liege ^(TALK) 09:07, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you, that is alright. I will do it again soon enough. I am happy enough to get the article to GA! Sadads (talk) 12:47, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Novels tagging

It may be a good idea to enable "general fixes" when banner tagging for Novels; this way, the "talk header" and the like will stay on the top where it belongs. Cheers, –xeno^talk 14:27, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

Cyber Rights

Hi, I noticed your listing at Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers, and thought you might be interested in reviewing the article Cyber Rights. It recently was promoted to GA status, and I started a peer review at Wikipedia:Peer review/Cyber Rights/archive1. Thanks so much for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 23:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

re Neal Stephenson

Utterly wonderful writer. I would be interested in helping out with this, but my skills as a writer are limited. As an editor, proofreader and polemicist I am more competent. I will certainly join in with your own contributions, but I may not be able to contribute much of my own original stuff. We'll see.

Incidentally, I read the fill text of the negative review of Quicksilver referred to in the text, and have to admit that I agree with every word of it. Except that I don't consider the points made as negative ... she condemns the books for all the reasons that I consider them works of genius, but then I'm a boy and she's a girl. --Matt Westwood 13:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

More I think she expected one thing out of the Historical fiction, and she got something halfway between historical fiction and science fiction, and thus was completely devastated. Sadads (talk) 18:14, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

You've probably already read it, but:

question 2 about literary respect

Perceptive guy. —Preceding unsigned comment added by WestwoodMatt (talk • contribs) 18:22, 18 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sadads. You have new messages at Airplaneman's talk page.
Message added 20:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Airplaneman ✈ 20:43, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go

First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far. We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns. See you at the finish!

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:23, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

GAN backlog elimination drive - 1 week to go

First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far. We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns. See you at the finish!

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 16:27, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

Assessment of Iceberg Theory

I had not requested an assessment because the article is in the process of being developed, but I'm curious why you would assess the prime writing theory of one of the most important 20th centuries writers, if not the most important, and for which he received a Nobel Prize in Literature, as low importance? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:08, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

Quicksilver copy edit - follow-up

Hi Sadads. I had asked to have one of my fellow Guild of Copy Editor members to review the Quicksilver article to get a fresh set of eyes on it. Other than a few little details which she immediately fixed she found the copy edit was satisfactory.

Thank you for the invite to cope edit the GA rated article and potential FAC. I will continue to watch this article and make further editing contributions to develop it when warranted. I have seen there are two more articles for the Baroque Cycle novels in the making, I would be interested in making contributions on those as well. Please let me know if you have any further needs on Quicksilver. I will add a GOCE tag to the article's Talk page as it is applicable. Thanks. dtgriffith (talk) 17:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

sadads, it looks like a whole new round of content development is in progress for Quicksilver. Give me a head's up when you're ready for me to do another copy edit with the new content. dtgriffith (talk) 23:53, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Comparison between Roman and Han Empires/Comparative studies of the Roman and Han empires

Hi, just curious, but you did so much talking at the Afd about you would volunteer to help make the article more historical in it's approach but when the time came for that you did not show up a single time. Why so? Nothing personal, but that's the misery of the inclusionists, declaring solemnly before the grand audience about how they save the article and the world, but chickening out like cowards once the limelight of the Afd is over. That's why I vote in those cases invariably for strong delete, because I don't buy in these hollow promises. Next time keep your mouth shut, if you can't keep what you promise. Regards Gun Powder Ma (talk) 10:36, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

At the time, I thought I had the expertise and access to the scholarship, but it appears I did not and my expertise got me caught up in a number of other things. If you still want help, I can come back during the next couple of weeks. That and school took over my lifeSadads (talk) 14:13, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Sadads. You have new messages at Auntieruth55's talk page.
Message added 21:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Auntieruth55 (talk) 21:16, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Responding to February Shadows copy edit request

Hi Sadads, thank you again for thinking of me. I am happy to take this on. I can start immediately for an hour. My schedule this weekend is somewhat busy, so I will do my best to squeeze this in. Fortunately, the text is in fairly good shape. I will post follow-up comments, findings and such on the article Talk page. dtgriffith (talk) 21:53, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

Update – I will be resuming work on this article in a few hours and should have it completed tonight. dtgriffith (talk) 19:23, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Finished copy edit

Hi Sadads, I have finished the copy edit to the best of my ability for this pass. I am sure if I return to this article with a clear mind in a week I could do some more productive work on it. I hope in the meantime this is satisfactory for your needs. Please let me know what you think. Thanks. dtgriffith (talk) 00:42, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! I will mark the Talk page with a GOCE tag and continue to watch it. dtgriffith (talk) 02:41, 4 May 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive

GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive. 661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold. The WP:GAN page started at 110,126 bytes length on 1 April and ended at 43,387 bytes length at the end of 30 April (a 66,739 byte reduction in the page, about 60.6% less). Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days. 63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success. The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less). For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.

–MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:46, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Category repopulating

Just out of curiosity why did you depopulate Category:War novels set in Anglo-Saxon England‎ and then redirect it? Sadads (talk) 15:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Hi. Thanks for the question. I merged Category:War novels set in Anglo-Saxon England‎ with Category:Novels set in Anglo-Saxon England‎ to assist navigation. See WP:OC#NARROW and WP:OC#SMALL. The War novels cat only held a couple of books and was an unnecessary split as the main cat is not large anyway. At some point if the cat becomes overpopulated a split would be worthwhile, and consideration given to the best way of doing that. Most novels set in Anglo-Saxon England‎ tend to involve a war as that was the nature of the times, so that may not be the most useful way of splitting the cat. There is some value in having a cat for war novels, though that could overlap with cats organised by time-periods, and be organised by specific wars and protagonists. SilkTork *^YES! 22:10, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Timex Group USA, Inc. – looking for a review

Hi Sadads, I am hoping you can help me out. I have rewritten the article Timex Group USA, Inc. which I need reviewed, especially checked for COI and NPOV compliance. The new article draft can be found at User:Dtgriffith/Timex Group USA, Inc. I had opened it up for review on the main article's Talk page about two weeks ago and have received no responses. Though there is no rush, I am hoping to get this done sooner than later as I had started on this article about seven months ago. If you are able to help, please post your feedback on the Talk:Timex Group USA, Inc. Thanks! dtgriffith (talk) 19:21, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

I am in the middle of exams at school, I can start doing it at the beginning of the week. Sadads (talk) 21:41, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

That would be great, thank you! dtgriffith (talk) 21:54, 3 May 2010 (UTC)

Hello, Sadads. You have new messages at User talk:Dtgriffith/Timex Group USA, Inc..
Message added 18:13, 7 May 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Talk:Ashaig

Thank you for your interest in Ashaig. But I wonder if it is really an appropriate candidate for Wikipedia:WikiProject Anglo-Saxon Kingdoms. I'm not aware that the Anglo-Saxons ever reached the Western Highlands of Scotland - and they certainly never established a kingdom there. What do you think? 45ossington (talk) 07:20, 12 May 2010 (UTC)

Talk:Margaret Clitherow

I think you'll find Margaret Clitherow (1556 – March 25, 1586)is of a later date than Anglo Saxon Kingdoms :)--J3Mrs (talk) 08:53, 17 May 2010 (UTC)

Anglo-Saxon Monarchs merger proposal

My appologies. It is not my intention to step all over your edits, though I can see how I gave the wrong impression. I will contact you first in the future. Mea culpa! =) Revcasy (talk) 13:46, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Hrrm. I see now that I may have been confused about the chain of events on my own watchlist re: your edit summaries. hah! In any case... *bows* Revcasy (talk) 13:50, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Names of God in Old English poetry

Just so you know, I've added sources, and actually found more examples for this article. It was wikified, so I don't think that tag was really justified, but I'm curious why you tagged it as OR? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 14:41, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

De Iniusta Vexacione Willelmi Episcopi Primi

I've removed the AS Kingdoms tag from this, as it's a tractate from the reign of William Rufus, dealing with events in that reign, and is thus a bit out of the timeframe of the Anglo-Saxon kingdoms. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:54, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

Thanks...

...for the barnstar! Replied on my page. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:17, 18 May 2010 (UTC)

DYK nomination

I wouldn't have done it without your instigation so I've added you as co-nom for the DYK of the dragon. We'll see how it goes. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:34, 20 May 2010 (UTC)