User talk:Dabomb87

Extra! Extra! Read all bout it!

Even Rubin and Cole say Tennis expert has lost it. Ohconfucius (talk) 12:30, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

• I'm now extremely concerned that he may be repressing his anger, which may lead to severe problems down the line. Ohconfucius (talk) 02:03, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/Seinfeld (season 2)

You weak opposed 11 days ago but the nominator seems to have addressed your concerns. Does your oppose still stand? Scorp and I would like to close it before the end of the day, otherwise it will be open until Wednesday. Regards, Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 22:35, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Yep, I am still not satisfied with the prose. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, could you say as much at the nomination? Cheers! Matthewedwards (talk • contribs • email) 23:06, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah, sorry, I should have done that. However, it was archived before I was able to return. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:54, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

FLC - List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK)

Hi, I have answered all your queries on the review page - there are now no redirects and I have given my opinion on one of the external links. Could you check the review page again and let me know what is happening. 03md (talk) 09:23, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

I gave my input, I see it as a bit questionable.--<TRUCO> ⁵⁰³ 16:24, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Could you check the FLC review page again - I have changed the external link requested and hope that everything should be fine now. Thanks for all your help. 03md (talk) 11:23, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Please don't archive discussion

Please don't archive discussion on the workshop page. I'm going through it at the minute and it's something that should be left to a clerk. People have already reverted you on some of your movements which should suggest that people aren't happy about what you're doing. Ryan Postlethwaite^{See the mess I've created or let's have banter} 22:55, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry. Won't happen again. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:56, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

TRM

Thanks for your message. Don't worry. He's been trying to stay in touch throughout his world tour, but some places are just a bit too remote, even today!

He's bound to be back - I promised him I'd work with him on getting John Wark to FA when he returns, and he knows how much I, as a Norwich fan, detest John Wark. That alone should be enough to trump any reluctance he has at the end of his wikibreak! --Dweller (talk) 11:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Review

Hi, could you please check if your concerns about the article Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Knight's Cross recipients of the Kriegsmarine have been addressed? Your feedback is most welcomed. MisterBee1966 (talk) 16:55, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

List of United States Naval Academy alumni

This is sort of long, and there are dozens more that could be added, so I’m not sure what to do with this. It still needs work with things like formatting; first only linked, consistency in dates 1999-2000 vs (1999-2000), verbiage, etc. West Point would be even worse, Air Force, CG, and Merchant Marine not so bad. I hope to get to FL, maybe even a featured topic. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:46, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Respond here: User_talk:Rlevse#Re:_List_of_United_States_Naval_Academy_alumni please. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:00, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

See three ? there. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:08, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Deletion Reasons

I have added some data at the discussion pages, but without any answer or given reason, they have been deleted. I propose that a reason is given for each deletion, in top of the deleted text, or in the History Records.. --Dagofloreswi (talk) 04:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

An example

D'oh!

Yeah, I forgot. I'm using AWB at the moment and I'll do some closures in about 20 minutes. Thanks for the reminder. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:02, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I need to revisit the older FLCs real quick. Hopefully, I can finish in time. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:06, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I can give you some more time if you like. Just let me know when you are done, then I'll do some closures. -- Scorpion⁰⁴²² 00:08, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. Real life has been busy, and the date arbitration case has sapped most of my Wiki time. I shouldn't be long, there is only a couple FLCs that are ready for pr/ar that I haven't revisited. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:11, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/BBC Sports Personality of the Year Lifetime Achievement Award

Maybe...forgot to watch that =.= I'll do it by 8:00UTC. -- [[SRE.K.A.L.|L.A.K.ERS]] 00:49, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:List of wind farm projects in Romania

 Done. I would oppose it due to that note that state's some of the most important, but I may be misinterpreting it. The lead also doesn't say much about the list itself.--TRUCO 01:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Rufus Wainwright discography

Well, unfortunately, the discography was denied FL promotion. I have no problem with Drewcifer's opposition, but I am still not sure about the best solution to the sources issue that was raised. I have asked him specifically what I can do to earn his support when I re-submit the list for FL status, and I hope you will provide me with your support once again. If needed, I can let you know when I re-submit the list. Thanks again for all the assistance and suggestions you have provided in the past! -Another Believer (talk) 02:53, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I am busy and will come back in about 10 hours. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

List of United States Naval Academy alumni topic samples

Would something like this be okay for say the astronaut section:

Astronauts

Main article: List of United States Naval Academy alumni (Astronauts)

or just what template should I use there? Should I put any sample astronauts or just list them all in the sub article?

template is now sortable, Gadget850 updated the code for me. — Rlevse • Talk • 03:35, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I am busy and will come back in about 10 hours. Dabomb87 (talk) 13:30, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

I also don't see where the Waterloo list has its notability criteria, for me, they have to meet wiki article criteria and actually have an article. The question about what template to use to link to a sub article and do I need to list any sample alumni in the main article remains too. — Rlevse • Talk • 02:57, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

It seems to me that you could include the most notable astronauts, with a {{main}} link to the subarticle. It could be difficult to determine which are the most notable, though, so maybe you could include the first 5 or so in alphabetical order? –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 03:32, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

OK, I think I'll go with that plan, name the subpages ".... (Topic)" like the astronaut one above, with 5 sample grads on the central list with a main link to subpage with the full list of astronauts (or whatever). Any more input, please post on my talk page. Thanks for the help to all. — Rlevse • Talk • 11:02, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Sounds good. Let me know if you need any help. –Juliancolton ^{Tropical Cyclone} 16:47, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Popotan episodes

I believe I have resolved it with that last citation.じんない 05:28, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Before I resubmit the article, I'd like to know if the database is fine for the entire timeline given that it gives the first and last dates shown and says it aired every Thursday. I don't believe that would constitute original research to basically look at a calander and confirm that Thursday was those days.じんない 22:52, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

I don't either, but you may want to ask that question on WT:FLC just to be sure. Dabomb87 (talk) 23:06, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

List of Philadelphia Phillies first-round draft picks

I have to say that I respectfully disagree that there is no good reason to change the font size of the key, and no, I don't think it's necessary to change the others. One, we aren't making robot lists, and two, I believe that the table is more visually appealing (per Cr.6) with a smaller key because it draws the readers' eyes downward to the main thrust of the article. Honestly, I see no reason why keys shouldn't be at the bottom as clarifiers, but the top is always the way it's been done, so I continue that way. On the team seasons lists, the playoff keys are usually noted in a small font, which was my first FL and is why I continue to make small keys. KV5 • Squawk box • Fight on! 12:40, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

FLC fix

Thanks for fixing the malformed FLC I created. I was fixing it in the "review" I added but you beat me to it by a few minutes. :) Rambo's Revenge (talk) 13:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Willowtip Records discography

Forgot this? Cannibaloki 03:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! Cannibaloki 04:15, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Userbox for GA reviews

The userbox {{User Good Articles reviewed}} has been updated so that it can now link to a page in your user subspace where you keep track of all your GA reviews, if you have such a page. This can be done by adding a | and then the name of your user subpage (or subsection of your regular user page) wherever you have the template called. For example, on my user page I am using

{{User Good Articles reviewed|6|User:Rjanag/GA reviews}}

which displays as

This user has reviewed 6 Good Article nominations on Wikipedia.

There is more information on how to do this at Template:User Good Articles reviewed.

Note: If you are not interested in doing this, you don't have to do anything; the template will still work for you exactly as it does now.

Best, rʨanaɢ ^talk/_contribs 17:50, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Bleach chapters

Although truco and goodraise say there are a few grammar issues, the left a weak support until it could be worked. Any idea of what it is? It seems a bit trivial since they left a weak support.Tintor2 (talk) 22:54, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

System of a Down discography

"How about a general overview on the band? See Pendulum discography as an example." Hey! Cannibaloki 02:27, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I fail to see the irony. Dabomb87 (talk) 02:29, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Because it does not exist. Just take a look in the page above, and see the difference regarding your suggestion. Cannibaloki 02:35, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

The irony! Cannibaloki 02:45, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

User adding list of stocks to articles

Hi, if you can, could you weigh in on User_talk:Iifacts#Stock_information? A user is adding a list of stocks that Warren Buffett owns to his article (here, here, and here), and so I am removing them. But they added them back again, so before this turns into anything bigger, could you please have a look and weigh in? Thanks in advance! Gary King (talk) 02:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comment; Warren Buffett and Berkshire Hathaway could probably use a few more people watching them as him and his company have recently been in the news a few times lately, more than normal. Gary King (talk) 02:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

"A few times" seems below average to me ;) Dabomb87 (talk) 02:42, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

Warren Buffett Page

To Dabomb87: it seems that you are in charge here...the stock info is up-to-date and verifiable (SEC.gov), I will maintain that. Removing stock holding info from Warren Buffett's page is doing a disservice to the readers.

Also, it's no right to have one person dictating the page. Gary works hard but it does not mean he did something right and useful.