User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 14

Archive 10

←

Archive 12

Archive 13

Archive 14

Archive 15

Archive 16

→

Archive 20

One more question

I have one more question regarding Featured Articles: If someone who has conbributed to the article reatly gave me permission to promote it, am I allowed to? Please respond ASAP.Secret Saturdays (talk) 01:06, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I believe so, but can you show me where the significant contributor has agreed to this? Dabomb87 (talk) 02:34, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

It was Immblueversion. The message is shown here. Secret Saturdays (talk) 20:31, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks ...

... for fixing my page move! I suspected I had screwed up. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 15:26, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Wall of Fame

That key addition seems a bit wordy. Is it necessary? KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:08, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, otherwise it was ambiguous to readers as to what "Links to the corresponding Major League Baseball season" means. I think this should be fixed on all your lists. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:10, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I disagree; I don't find it ambiguous at all. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:13, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Well obviously you and I will not, as we are veteran Wikipedia editors. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:17, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

I guess it just surprised me a bit because that seems to be standard not only in my lists, but in a host of other baseball FLs. Certainly we won't be surprised, and I guess sometimes it's hard to step outside of that box. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 23:20, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

GAN:FG

I nominated fg to a ga so can you review it. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:50, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

List of international cricket centuries by Virender Sehwag

Hi, I was wondering why List of international cricket centuries by Virender Sehwag was not promoted. It received only one review while in FLC, and all concerns were answered. What should I do to fix it before nominating again? Thanks, Abeer.ag (talk) 23:51, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi. Unfortunately, one review is really not enough to determine consensus. Reviewers may have been put off because of the discussion about merging the list in the intial FLC, and did not want to review something that potentially could have been; you might want to ensure that those concerns have been resolved. The only thing I can advise you to do is to wait a week or so before renominating the list to FLC so as to not overload the process (which partially explains lack of reviews), and when you do re-submit it, advertise the discussion widely. Sometimes, a clean, new FLC page looks far more inviting to reviewers than old stale ones. Good luck! Dabomb87 (talk) 23:57, 1 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank You. Abeer.ag (talk) 01:50, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

List of American politicians that admit to cannabis use

As an administrator, I thought you might want to offer an opinion here as to whether or not this proposed list is appropriate and up to Wikipedia standards (of course, the list would be expanded and the lead would be expanded to include additional context). If this list is inappropriate to begin with, I will not even start the page. However, I don't see how this information couldn't be found elsewhere, as each entry is cited appropriately. I am simply trying to think of other lists that could be created for WikiProject Cannabis. If you have an opinion, it would be much appreciated. Otherwise, keep up all the great work you do here! --Another Believer _(Talk) 05:37, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Intimacy FAC

Do you "feel that all your concerns have been satisfactorily addressed and/or responded to"? Just wondering if you're able to take a stance. Thanks. RB88 (T) 11:14, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Inbox

DaBomb, I've sent you an email. Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  21:35, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Ditto. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:44, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

Received and replied to both. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:58, 3 October 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/World Series Most Valuable Player Award/archive1

I understand. Thanks for notifying! -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:24, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

reflist change

Hey there.. Any chance you can explain why this edit was made? (I prefer the 3-column format, myself.) Scartol • Tok 20:10, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Three columns break on some browsers. Colwidth allows the reflist to expand into as many columns as a browser and monitor will allow. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:22, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Except that now I see only two columns on my screen. (Even when I stretch the window way out in width.) Perhaps there's a third way? Scartol • Tok 02:26, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

You must have a small screen then. There will be three or more columns only if you are using a resolution of 1280 or more pixels. Gary King (talk) 02:55, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

So for people with "a small screen", the colwidth approach forces us to see two very wide columns? Strikes me as an imperfect approach. I'm willing to accept that there may be problems with the reflist approach, but it seems like there should be some way to make both work. Scartol • Tok 12:28, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

PS. How about this? Scartol • Tok 12:33, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

That's fine too. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

co-noms for FLCs

Hi - Quite a while ago you asked if the bot could pay attention to the "Nominator" line in the FLC archives, see user talk:Rick Bot#Co-noms on FLCs?. I've just made this change. If you notice anything screwy please let me know. -- Rick Block (talk) 00:56, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Question

Hi. I received a note, and the same note was posted at Talk:List of awards and nominations received by No Country for Old Men about how it doesn't meet featured list criteria. Could you look at this and comment? What has changed so drastically that 9 months after passing it no longer would pass? And why would anyone post to use the example from a list they had passed through FL and carry it as something they accomplished? It gives me pause. Wildhartlivie (talk) 05:42, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

30 Rock (season 3)

Thanks for all the fixes! Staxringold _talk^contribs 23:41, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikilinks

I would never mind the addition of wikilinks. I leave them simply because I forget about them in general. They are just one of those things that tend to slip my mind. Thanks. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:38, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

4 Minutes promotion

Thanks Dabomb. Couldn't have done it without all the help from you guys. It was a wonderful morning for me when I logged in Wiki and first thing I saw that the article has been promoted. You will see more wonderful work on music articles in the FAC from me. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 03:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Order of battle in the Atlantic campaign of 1806‎ FLC

Thankyou very much for your comments and support at the successful Featured List candidature for Order of battle in the Atlantic campaign of 1806. Your participation was much appreciated. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 06:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

FLC backlog

If there's anything I can do to help alleviate the current FLC backlog, please let me know. Thanks. KV5 (Talk • Phils) 19:36, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Pardon me for butting in, but any reviews you could do would be great. Otherwise I think we've got it covered.... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

A request...

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Urse d'Abetot/archive1 at the top? Please? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:30, 8 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:02, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Dates

Hi -- regarding your edits today at Sam Fuld, while I agree that (as of a few days ago) Wikipedia specifically discourages the format that MLB.com uses, it is not clear that it encourages the YYYY-MM-DD format. Discussion is going on with regard to whether that format should be overtly forbidden in footnotes (as it is in text), though a strong majority at the moment are not in favor of that. Still, its something under discussion at the moment. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but you seem to have changed only some of the dates, whereas they were all consistent before (albeit some in a format that has just been forbidden), we now have inconsistency which I believe we do not want per MOS directives. Finally, I would think that in baseball article we would want formats more likely to be familiar to American baseball fans -- do you agree? Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 01:21, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

Hi, I'll reply to this this afternoon. Dabomb87 (talk) 12:51, 6 October 2009 (UTC)

I made the date formats consistent now. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:48, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

I have a handy script you can use to convert the YYYY-MM-DD format dates into the more common Month DD, YYYY (or DD Month YYYY) format, if you want it. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:52, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

That's cool! Is there someplace I can go to learn how to use a script (I've never done that). Tx.--Epeefleche (talk) 02:53, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Click on this link and paste the following code onto that page:

importScript('User:Plastikspork/date.js');

Save the page, then do a hard refresh. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:55, 7 October 2009 (UTC)

Great stuff! Many thanks. I guess it only changes the YYYY-MM-DD formats, right? Also -- for some reason, when I tried it on Bernie Madoff it left footnote 82 in the YYYY-MM-DD format. A bug? Or because it wasn't preceded by accessed/retrieved?--Epeefleche (talk) 05:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Availability note

I'm currently mired in real-life obligations, and am battling the flu. I'm optimistic that my editing levels will normalize soon, but don't be surprised if I don't respond to your query in a timely manner. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 02:28, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Should be back to normal, although I am a bit drained. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Date formats

Thanks a lot for doing the formatting on Snow Patrol discography. How did you do it? Which script did you use? Thanks. Suede67 (talk) 01:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Paste importScript('User:Plastikspork/date.js'); into your monobook.js. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:15, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Done, how does it work? I didnt get it. Suede67 (talk) 04:19, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't forget to bypass your cache. After you have done so, in the edit screen, you'll find a few new buttons on the left side of the screen, under the toolbox: "Sprk: cite date mdy", "Sprk: cite date dmy" and "UnSprk: cite date". The first two are pretty self-explanatory, and the last has the function of changing the dates to YYYY-MM-DD, or undoing an action done with the other "Sprk" date formatting functions. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Found them, thanks! Suede67 (talk) 04:28, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Hat in hand

DaBomb, thanks again for all you do and for following me around and picking up pieces. I can't seem to find the right template to fix. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Attachment theory/archive1; can you adjust that wording to say not to edit above the line, except to add co-noms? It seems there is some confusion there. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Like this? Dabomb87 (talk) 17:57, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for your assistance in helping List of Outer Hebrides to become a Featured List. It's much appreciated. I apologise for being a sorting duffer - it's over a year since my last attempt and the tables were simply prepared using previously (apparently) adequate systems. I think I see the difference from the last fixes now. Ben MacDui 12:27, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Ball, court, yours

Following the rather unpleasant atmosphere that's come out of the FL criteria redlink discussion and closing out the Outer Hebrides list, I'd appreciate it if you could do the next couple of rounds of closures. I may not do it perfectly but some folks seem to imply I'm (borderline) incompetent. I'll go back to being a simple reviewer for a while. Glorious. The Rambling Man (talk) 18:18, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

• I <3 you TRM, screw anyone who thinks anything less. Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you

see barnstar page 01:51, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

30 Rock

Thanks for paying such close attention to the FLC. Like I said, the re-sourcing is the one issue left (along with reworking some plot summaries, but that's easy). Staxringold _talk^contribs 03:01, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Proposed Arbcom Motion re date delinking

As a potentially interested party, your attention is brought to a motion currently being considered by the Arbitration Committee:
Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Motions#Motion to amend Wikipedia:Requests for arbitration/Date delinking.

At the time this notice was posted the text of the motion read:

“ Wikipedia:Date formatting and linking poll, Wikipedia talk:Full-date unlinking bot#RFC, and Wikipedia:Bots/Requests for approval/Full-date unlinking bot indicate that Full-date unlinking bot (BRFA · contribs · actions log · block log · flag log · user rights) fulfills the requirement for "a Community approved process for the mass delinking" in "1.3 Mass date linking" and the requirement for "[d]ate delinking bots [performing] in a manner approved by the Bot Approvals Group" in "2.1 Date delinking bots". The Committee thanks the participants for their efforts and encourages them to continue with their contructive work and consensus building. ”

This wording may have since changed; please see the above link for the current wording.

On behalf of the Arbitration Committee, Manning (talk) 09:54, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Papers filed...

Welcome onboard. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:30, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and any reason why we shouldn't accept more than one list at a time from one contributor? I would accept we need wordings to try to prevent people nominating similar lists with similar problems in parallel, but otherwise I think it's fine... The Rambling Man (talk) 14:49, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, and I restored the original wording. The change was as much mental as it was a concrete limit, and was only a temporary thing to jump-start reviews (I think it was successful in that respect). Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Article history stuff. Surely we can request a bot to do what you're doing? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:08, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

GimmeBot (talk · contribs) used to do it, but was banned from this task because of a few controversial edits it made. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:10, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Dang. Maybe we can request a new bot to give it a go? The Rambling Man (talk) 19:14, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

It might be easier to just get GimmeBot to do this again, minus the controversial edits (namely, removing transcluded GA reviews from talk pages). Dabomb87 (talk) 19:24, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Sounds like a good idea. Your time is much better spent doing positive things, not secretarial jobs (if you don't mind me saying...) The Rambling Man (talk) 19:27, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:closures. I need to start getting onto them soon. If you fancy doing more stuff then I guess I'll leave it to you to do the closures, or we can wait until Tuesday... The Rambling Man (talk) 19:43, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Would you guys like to try a rotational system? For example, one week TRM can do FLC closures, and I'll do FLRC. Next week, I'll do FLC closures and Dabomb will do FLRC. Following week Dabomb can do FLC closures, and TRM will do FLRC. Of course, if you'll be away, let the other two know. iMatthew ^talk at 19:46, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't have the time either. I had 5 minutes this morning to check my watchlist, but that's probably all the time I'll get on here today. Sorry ;-( iMatthew ^talk at 10:14, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

a favour?

heya, was just wondering when you have a spare 5mins if you could give the Ne-Yo discography a copy-edit for me? cuz you're really good at phrasing things :) but if you can't then nevermind. thanks. Mister sparky (talk) 21:10, 9 October 2009 (UTC)

Will look when I get the time. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:32, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

thank you for doing that for me! appreciate it :) Mister sparky (talk) 22:40, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

ooh another thing, the nomination was closed before mattedwards could comment on the resolved issues, so i have re-nominated the article and would be greatful if you could pop by and take a look? :) thanks. Mister sparky (talk) 16:11, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

ani

If you're able to confirm or deny my observations re: the FLC logs here, it'd be appreciated. Doctor Sunshine (talk) 22:23, 10 October 2009 (UTC)

I don't mean to sound uncaring, but it really is out of my hands now. If you would like to re-open the RfC again, feel free to. Truthfully, I don't remember seeing too many opposes over redlinks, although reviewers have always strongly encouraged the nominator to blue them. If I get time to provide concrete evidence, I will let you know. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:05, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Just as an aside Dabomb87, if you see me (or my "confused" viewpoint) mentioned on AN/I and no-one's notified me, could you drop me a note so I can make my position known? Cheers. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:09, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry about it. Although it may be something to watch out for. If there's a consensus in the field, or even if there's no consensus on which reading of "minimal" to use, the red link opposes are dubious. If you're focusing on the backlog right now, in the long term I assume FL wants growth and this is a silly obstacle to non–recent, English language, pop culture related material. You guys are rocking a pretty high television episode guide ratio. A month writing, a month in FLC waiting for someone able to review the Japan language sources and then I'm expected to spend at least twice that writing stubs—if I can even discern enough context from the Japanese language sources for those stubs. Maybe I'm preaching to the converted but I assure you if I'm the only one saying this, there are others out there who haven't bothered. End rant. Anyway, I appreciate your assistance with everything. Take care, Doctor Sunshine (talk) 17:00, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Double checking

Just checking, FYI: User_talk:NuclearWarfare#FAC_redirects. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:02, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Basketball Hall of Fame

I think we should continue with the Basketball Hall of Fame FT. I plan on nominating List of members of the Basketball Hall of Fame when my list is done.—Chris!_c/t 23:45, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Go ahead. I'll help out when I have time. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:45, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

The Frances Pomeroy Naismith Award is pretty hard to make it into an FL, but I'll try my best to fix that. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 06:12, 15 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Oxford United F.C. players FLC

Where there any other points that needed looking at apart from the link? Eddie6705 (talk) 06:40, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll try to review it when I can. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:13, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Dabomb87. You have new messages at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style (dates and numbers)/Datestempprotectedsection.
Message added 22:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ckatz^chat_spy 22:45, 16 October 2009 (UTC)

Help

Hey Dabomb87, i am new to this, so excuse my naiveness. :) On your page it says you have sent me a message on my talk page, but when i go to "my talk" section it says a page has not been made. Do you mind letting me know how to find that page, or re-advising me on your page and i will check it. Sorry,

Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 123jac123 (talk • contribs) 00:05, 17 October 2009

This edit triggered the message. Welcome to Wikipedia, and feel free to ask me any more questions if you have them. Regards, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:54, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

I will Withdraw

Thanks for the message. After being on a impromptu WikiBreak, I decided that withdrawing my support of the Chicago bid for the 2016 Summer Olympics. It is clear that this article won't meet the standards which is why I decided after my other GA bids have either succeded or failed, I won't nominate any more GA or FAs until the next WikiCup starts (and contribute greatly to them). Thank You. Secret Saturdays (talk) 21:31, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

List of Nobel Peace Prize laureates

Hello, Dabomb87. This message is being sent to inform you that there currently is a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. Celestra (talk) 22:39, 17 October 2009 (UTC)

review

can you review family guy's peer reviw.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 16:32, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

If you mean Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Family Guy cast members/archive1, yes, I will take a look at that (probably next week or the week after that). Dabomb87 (talk) 16:33, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

well i was meaning the Wikipedia:Peer review/Family Guy/archive4, but any of them would be cool.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 16:37, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Sociology

Wha' happened? That page has significant opposes and commentary and should be archived. Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sociology/archive1; I'm dashing, can you clean up and make sure there are still templates on talk for botification? I'll leave it in your hands. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:36, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry about that. The page was blanked when I got there. I'll clean up now. Dabomb87 (talk) 17:09, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm home now ... I think I got most of the pieces, and you only had to remove the speedy, right? Thanks as always ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:20, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

List of concert tours by Michael Jackson and The Jackson 5

I noted you support this FLC. I just had a look at it and thought it could easily fall foul of 3b? Tours of MJ to the MJ page, tours of Jackson 5 to J5 page...? The Rambling Man (talk) 16:52, 18 October 2009 (UTC)

FAC issues tackled

I've addressed all of the issues that you raised on Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Inner German border/archive1 - please leave some feedback when you've got a moment! -- ChrisO (talk) 22:47, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Sources

I've resolved the sourcing issue you raised at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Major League Baseball players with 100 triples/archive1. --Coemgenus 01:29, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Response

Thanks for the advice. The linking of "frog" and "turtle" was actually my choice, not suggested by the tool which generally only picks out phrases rather than individual words. I thought they were relevant within the subject of the article, and I appreciate the correction. Katharineamy (talk) 08:54, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

WP:TFAR

Hiya, DaBomb.

I want to put Flywheel, Shyster, and Flywheel up at WP:TFAR for November 28, but I'm unsure of how many points it will get. I would be the first time I've made a request there, although another article I nominated at FAC has featured on the main page. It has date relevance in that it's the 77th anniversary of the first episode. I'm not sure what points it will get for its subject matter though. It's a radio series, there is only one other similar article at FA, and that's Hitchhiker's Guide, but then I don't know if it falls under "radio", in which case Mutual Broadcasting System for October 29 may have an impact, or whether it would fall under "Media", in which case it could scupper all chances of it appearing. I see you there all the time so how many points do you think it would be? Best, Matthewedwards :  Chat  17:08, 20 October 2009 (UTC)

Your best bet is to post at WT:TFAR to get several opinions. As for me, I do think that MBS would be similar enough to potentially reduce the points received. Still worth a try though. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:50, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Okay, thanks! Matthewedwards :  Chat  03:03, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Query

What do you think about adminship? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:52, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Not a flat-out refusal forever and a day, but the short answer is not now. Too busy, uninterested, unprepared, etc. See User talk:Dabomb87/Archive 12#RfA. I might seriously consider it the middle of next year though. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:55, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

OK; ping me if you want a nom or co-nom! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:57, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Count me in if you have a desire for a nom that's more interesting than Sandy's :P I suspect you'll have the full support of the Sooper Sekrit Featured Kontent Kabal if you ever decide you could use the tools :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:28, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I have the feeling that the Diabolically Devilish Date Delinking Dissentients would have a field day with any RfA of mine, but I think I can take that risk, sooner or later. :) Dabomb87 (talk) 03:31, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

I've never nommed an RFA that failed, but I'm willing to take that risk; my hunch is that most people would think that an oppose based on that mess is silly. I could be biased :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:35, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

You wouldn't want to ruin her record, now, would you? It's best I take the risk then (as far as I know, I've never nom'd anybody, actually.) As an aside, I think I'll have a little more time to devote to wiki activities in the coming months, and hopefully the damned GA Sweeps will be over by the end of the year, so I should be able to do more frequent FLC image checks as needed. Just ping me if you need me. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 03:45, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

Heh, I was always a bit miffed that Sandy had never offered to nominate me, but now I see why. She has a record to protect. Anyway, Dabomb, I just dropped by to ask if there's anything more I should be doing at WP:FLC/recessions. I've actively looked for reviewers (and have successfully attracted some copy editors) but the set of editors familiar with reviewing for both economics and FLC appears to be the null set. Should I keep searching? Wait for Diaa? Surrender? Whatever you advise, thanks again for your patience so far. --JayHenry (talk) 04:09, 21 October 2009 (UTC)

30 Rock Update

I finally have an idea for resourcing at the 30 Rock FLC. The source is reliable, it is directly quoting the releases, want to know if it's acceptable for you guys. If so this is a quick fix, if not I'll have to go source by source. Staxringold _talk^contribs 01:07, 22 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Madonna albums discography/archive1‎

Ping :) Addressed your concenrns there! --Legolas ^(talk2me) 05:26, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Re:

Wait, why should I tell you when I'm doing closures? You guys never send me a notice when you are doing them, so I'm sure you get my confusion. I think having anybody close them is a terrible idea. Like I told TRM, I'll do closures this weekend, so there isn't any need to anybody else to worry about them. iMatthew ^talk at 18:29, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh. But I believe he did leave a comment on TRM's page. iMatthew ^talk at 22:13, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Oh man! Unfortunately, I won't be able to do closures tomorrow, like I thought I'd be able to. I'll have very little time on Wikipedia tomorrow due to an event I thought was next week. I'm so sorry! iMatthew ^talk at 00:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry too much. I'll be able to do some tomorrow. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Link to dab page in Not One Less

I undid your edit because, in this case, there is no independent article on the publication in question but the dab link has a sentence or two of info, and I have a disambiguator in the article (it's displayed as "Business Times (Singapore)") to make it clear which thing is being linked to. If you disagree, I don't mind discussing it; I just undid for now because I, too, thought in the past about delinking it, but decided that this way was probably the best way to go. rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:51, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

Perhaps you can just move that info into a stub article? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:52, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

That sounds like a good plan; I could easy just copy-and-paste the current blurbs, with stub tags, to Business Times (Singapore) and Business Times (Kuala Lumpur). But is there anything special I need to do for attribution (for example, is there some way to duplicate and preserve the page history at both new pages, or is it sufficient just to have the old history left in the dab page, with a pointer in my edit summary when I create t he new ones)? rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 22:55, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure. Do talk page stalkers (hope I have some) want to chime in on this? Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm asking on IRC now, but I linked to this discussion...so apologies if you get bombarded for a few minutes :) rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:01, 23 October 2009 (UTC) They said it's fine just to do a copy-paste move, so I've done that. I'll go fix the link in Not One Less now. Thanks, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 23:02, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

favor

now that your around can you review the Family guy cast.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 22:58, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

I worked a bit on it. Will do more later. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:22, 23 October 2009 (UTC)

thanks for editing it it relly helps but i was hopeing you could review it.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 22:10, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Curious about recessions in the United States FLC

Hey, I've been wondering. What kept you from passing this FLC? All issues seem to have been addressed and the support/oppose count is at 4/0. Goodraise 17:17, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm waiting for Diaa to make sure his concerns have been resolved. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

On a semi related note, in the closure log you said "Several lists are eligible to be promoted, but I could not archive them because I had reviewed them." I got the impression from this that you could close those you had reviewed, providing there wasn't a clear COI. Personally I trust your judgement, but I guess it is up to you about if you feel comfortable in doing this. Best, Rambo's Revenge (talk) 17:30, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I should have clarified that I had supported all of those lists. Dabomb87 (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I've done a round... The Rambling Man (talk) 18:56, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

(EC) You didn't support this one. Count now at 5/0. Goodraise 18:57, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

See my comment right below your initial one. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:11, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Goodness me. I'll attend that post-haste. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Gray's Inn

Thanks :) When you're done, can you update the diff I just put at WT:FAC? I couldn't find anything to nitpik at the song (We are the World). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:48, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm done with that article now. Looking for others that need cleaning up. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:49, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll fix the diff then; maybe you can eyeball We Are the World? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:49, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm on it. Dabomb87 (talk) 21:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Done with that one. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:50, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you; you're a dear. Long day at the office :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:51, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

Madonna albums discography

Dabomb, just asking a question. In the above discography which I nominated for FLC, do you find any discrepancy in the size of the table? I made them with the general audience in mind as these tables are really huge. --Legolas ^(talk2me) 08:51, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Snow Patrol discography/archive1

Hi, you have any idea when it will be closed (or why it hasnt). its essentially done, and both FLC closure days (wednesday and saturday) have passed once. is it because the reviewer did not check back? can the flc be failed for that reason? Suede67 (talk) 01:02, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I reviewed the list (and supported its promotion), so I can't promote it because of a conflict of interest. You may want to ask The Rambling Man (talk · contribs). Dabomb87 (talk) 12:40, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

Sure, I will ask him. Suede67 (talk) 15:10, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

List of members of the Basketball Hall of Fame

It seems there are a lot of opposition to this list. I think it would be good for you to comment at FLC when you have a chance.—Chris!_c/t 18:26, 29 October 2009 (UTC)

I'll take a look tomorrow. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:42, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

FLC

Well the other editor finished review ing the artical.--Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 02:45, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

I haven't had time to review or even read FLC this week. I'll try to take a look tomorrow or the day after. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:46, 30 October 2009 (UTC)

Ping

Are you around? I *finally* sent my miserable Windows Vista computer for an upgrade to Windows 7, and am working on a dinosaur tonight. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:01, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Yes, I'll be around for the next few hours. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:02, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Can I give you a list of the FACs I'm looking at, you start at the bottom, I start at the top? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:03, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Ready when you are. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:04, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

• Ethan Hawke
• Brazilian cruiser Bahia
• Alpine Chough
• Star Wars: Episode I: Battle for Naboo
• McDonald's Cycle Center
• J. C. W. Beckham
• Thomas R. Marshall
• Overman Committee

Thanks, DaBomb! I'll read through all of them, but you can probably get to the little things quicker than I can on this dinosaur. I should have my computer back early next week. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:08, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Did someone say "upgrade to Windows 7"? Was that a deliberate joke?! Good luck Sandy... don't get the "reboot blues..."... The Rambling Man (talk) 22:10, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Don't *even* get me started <grrrr ... > I put the whole long miserable story on Eubulides talk page :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:11, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Done with the first four. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm still reading, but the damn orange bar keeps going off on my talk !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:06, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Done with all of them. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 23:25, 31 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much; I'm still reading. I'd send you thousands of barnstars, but I've heard they're only for decorating the sides of barns :) Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)