User talk:LukeSurl/archive5

Thank you for all your help with "The Pete Holmes Show" and the cookies. Cheers, 108.60.63.183 (talk) 06:57, 12 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 January 2013, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2013 Houphouët-Boigny stampede, which you 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.

--Spencer^T♦C 19:03, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In the Wikipedia, you thank! Formerip (talk) 23:45, 3 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 January 2013, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2013 Uribana prison riot, 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.

--Spencer^T♦C 23:17, 26 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 31 January 2013, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2013 Australian Open, 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.

--Spencer^T♦C 05:36, 31 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'd overlooked "==ITN==" in the example. Thanks for removing it.  :) —David Levy 01:29, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luke, we're looking to finalise numbers and I just wanted to confirm that you're still interested in attending the event on 23-24th February? Thanks, Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 20:15, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes I am. Where in Manchester would it be, and what would be the best way to get there via public transport? Are travel/accommodation expenses covered? --LukeSurl ^{t c} 22:47, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the reply. Wikimedia UK would indeed cover travel and accommodation costs. As 18 people have registered their interest and there's only space for 12 we're in the process of chasing up who can come and who would need accommodation (arranged by Wikimedia UK). Would I be correct in assuming that given your question you will be needing accommodation? Details of the venue will be posted on the event page soon, and I'll be sending out a message to everyone when they go up (people are going to get sick of the sight of my signature!). Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 12:35, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I live in Norwich, from which travelling to pretty much anywhere is a bit of a mission, so yes, I would accommodation Friday and Saturday nights. I wasn't aware that space is so limited - if there are 12 people more local who wish to take part please do take me off the list and I'll wait for a similar session down south. LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:45, 11 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luke, the details of the venue are now on the UK wiki. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 13:57, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

After whittling down the people who didn't respond we still had 14 people interested in 12 places. Unfortunately this means two people miss out. We've decided to put you on the reserve list should anyone drop out. I hope this is ok. The suggested training session you want to run at your university sounds very interesting, so please do keep in contact about that, and I'll let you know when we arrange future events. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 15:40, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's OK, Thanks for letting me know and all the best! I'll be making some other plans for the weekend now so I'll drop myself from the reserve list if that's OK. Please let me know the next time there's a session! LukeSurl ^{t c} 19:04, 12 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That's absolutely fine, thanks for understanding and I'll make sure we contact you next time we have a training session. Richard Nevell (WMUK) (talk) 10:56, 13 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've begun the Good Article review for Mo Yan; your thoughts would be welcome on the review page. And thanks for the work you've already invested in this one! -- Khazar2 (talk) 03:28, 26 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 March 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 Six Nations Championship, which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 03:28, 18 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article 274301 Wikipedia, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Wikipedia was discovered in 2008 between Mars and Jupiter? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/274301 Wikipedia. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 1 April 2013 (UTC)

On 10 April 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article 2013 Grand National, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

ThaddeusB (talk) 16:30, 10 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 19 April 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Pervez Musharraf, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

NW (Talk) 16:30, 19 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 April 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Great Mosque of Aleppo, which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 02:09, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, do you have any idea as to how we can wikilink minaret on the front page? People seem to think that the whole mosque is destroyed!, Cheers, Huldra (talk) 23:08, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• The best place to do that would be to ask in this section. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 16:33, 28 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, have done. Cheers, Huldra (talk) 17:34, 29 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article A Boy and His Atom, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that each frame in the world's smallest film is only 45 nanometers wide? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Boy and His Atom. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 May 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Pakistani general election, 2013, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

ThaddeusB (talk) 02:17, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 23 May 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Philippine Senate election, 2013, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

ThaddeusB (talk) 23:56, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem with the close, it's probably a good idea. I knew it wouldn't be posted, or I'd've nominated it myself. As someone else did I bothered enough to support it. Tricky case as the notability was not sports related; I hope my comments show that I don't think UEFA or FIFA membership is inherently postable. 85.167.109.26 (talk) 23:25, 24 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article has been updated, so I wasn't sure if you might want to revise your vote to support? - Nbpolitico (talk) 16:32, 26 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good work on that. The Rambling Man (talk) 15:18, 27 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 May 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article Jack Vance, which you recently updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

Thanks a bunch, I appreciated the timely update! Jusdafax 01:23, 1 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jack Vance, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Steve Gould (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:30, 4 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear LukeSurl, thank you for volunteering as a host at the Teahouse. Wikipedia is a community of people working together to make knowledge free. You are an important part of that effort! By joining as a Host, you are helping new users get a hold of the ropes here at Wikipedia, and helping experienced users that just have a question about how something works. We appreciate your willingness to help!

Some links you may find helpful as a Host: Helpful scripts you can install to make Teahouse responding easier, templates to use, and the question forum.

Technical 13 (talk) 22:22, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, City of Bohane has been nominated as an In the News item. However, it needs to be further updated to meet the criteria (essentially, five sentences). Would you be able to add further to the article? Thanks, --RA (talk) 22:06, 8 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 11 June 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article City of Bohane, which you recently nominated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--Spencer^T♦C 14:30, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, LukeSurl, I'm Theonesean, the maitre d' for the Teahouse this week. I wanted to welcome you and say thanks for the helpful work you're doing there. If there's anything you ever need, don't hesitate to drop me a line. Thanks for being awesome, TheOneSean ^{[ U | T | C ]} 23:35, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your feedback. I have now removed the 'dubious' reference to 'bestselling' despite it being listed in a third-party source. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Iconovate (talk • contribs) 10:11, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Iconovate. To clarify, I declined the submission for the same reasons as it was previously deleted, the concerns raised at Wikipedia:Articles_for_deletion/Dean_Anthony_Gratton still applied. Unfortunately I do not believe this is a problem that is resolvable by improving the article draft. The article subject does not meet the notability criteria. Regards, --LukeSurl ^{t c} 10:20, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the help on archiving! Matty.007 11:02, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have granted file mover rights to your account following either a request for those rights or a clear need for the ability to move files. For information on the file mover rights and under what circumstances it is okay to move files, see Wikipedia:File mover. If you do not want file mover rights anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. INeverCry 18:13, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope that you don't mind that I tried helping with the DYK review. SL93 (talk) 19:58, 24 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Of course not :) It's good to collaborate! --LukeSurl ^{t c}

Thank you for helping :)

Bloom Cheryl (talk) 15:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello and thank you for your help. I modified the redirect Ashina Helu. Did I do this properly?--Taiping Tulip (talk) 20:16, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, that looks correct. :) --LukeSurl ^{t c} 20:17, 26 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the gift.--Taiping Tulip (talk) 14:56, 27 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LukeSurl, you rejected my article on the above today. I'm lost. Could you please be more specific regardng your issues? Kind regards Peteravel — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteravel (talk • contribs) 11:19, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Peteravel. This decline was a question of tone and focus. The draft has a slight "conversational" feel to it, with phrases such as "most notorious" and "An interesting ... aspect". It was unclear, particularly given the lead section, whether this was about Interest rate swaps (for which there is already an article), the UK scandal, or the specific FSA review into it. A key problem is that the article has no wikilinks. One should use wikilinks to link to other content in the encyclopaedia such that the user can gain context where needed. This allows the article to be more focussed and not have unnecessary text. For example, a well-placed link to Interest rate swap would save having to explain what an interest rate swap is in more detail.

I would advise you to rework your draft into an article under a more specific title (such as Misselling of interest rate swaps in the UK) which is about the scandal. I think this has the ingredients of a good article, it just needs a little work. I hope this is useful. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:09, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Very useful - thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Peteravel (talk • contribs) 12:18, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear LukeSurl,

I am writing to you because you have rejected my article and I don't know how can i correct it the right way. Please give me some help.

Thank you in advance,

Josef.smith1222 — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talk • contribs) 21:34, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Josef.smith1222. Sorry, I'm going on holiday for a few days, like, right now. If you're still in need of feedback on Tuesday I'll get back to you. In the meantime you might want to ask the nice people at the help desk. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 22:10, 28 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi LukeSurl, i have the same problem since you rejected my article, please if you are back review it again. Now I have more references which cover the text I have written. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Josef.smith1222 (talk • contribs) 12:36, 1 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear LukeSurl,

I believe that the main international scientific journals cited for my publications are not at all dependent on me. Please comment with a colleague more familiar with Wikipedia entries of international scientists. The only think I can do is to add one more public secondary reference (http://elpais.com/diario/1980/03/18/sociedad/322182003_850215.html) Other international press notes about my work in cancer reversal appeared in The Times of London, The Herald Tribune of USA, Mainichi of Japan and People’s Daily of Pekin from January 10th of 1980 onwards. I seem unable to enclose these secondary references in my Wikipedia entry because to find in the archives of these newspapers those notices on me it is required to be subscribed. Regards, Mario1109 (talk) 17:03, 3 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Mario,

One of Wikipedia's main pillars is that it provides a neutral point-of-view on subjects. It is practically impossible to do this when writing an article about yourself, and as such it is strongly discouraged. Please be aware that if the article is approved, you will not own it, and will have no more control over its content than any other individual editor.

Wikipedia's criteria for notability for academics is detailed at Wikipedia:Notability (academics). While I am sure all the journals you have been published in (both as first and as a contributing author) have high standards of peer-review, Wikipedia cannot have an article on every such published academic, hence the criteria in Wikipedia:Notability (academics) are different. Sources external to journals would be useful for showing to a layman that some of these criteria had been fulfilled, particularly 1) The person's research has made significant impact in their scholarly discipline, broadly construed, as demonstrated by independent reliable sources. While a colleague in your field may be able to infer this from the collection of publications, Wikipedia is written for and by laypeople and as such such statements need to be supported by independent sources.

The international media you discuss sounds promising. When citing such sources, a web link is useful but not necessary - just provide enough information that it would be possible for an average person with access to a good library to track it down. Wikipedia:Citing_sources#Newspaper_articles may be of use.

I hope this is useful. Regards, LukeSurl ^{t c} 10:09, 4 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have made the changes requested by the original reviewer (User talk:Techatology#Decline at Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Bioscale), which met with Techatology's approval. RadioFan is way off base. The Boston Globe (daily circulation 240K) does not have its reporters print press releases, nor I suspect do the Boston Business Journal, Xconomy or ProteoMonitor. 70.79.73.253 (talk) 22:45, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there. As a general rule re-submits with nil or only minor changes are automatically rejected, this is to prevent an author making repeated submissions until she finds a sympathetic reviewer. However, our "Court of Appeal" is Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/Help desk. If you post there, raising the concerns you write here, you will reach multiple editors who may be able to help you. Regards, --LukeSurl ^{t c} 08:13, 11 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've given the editor some advice directly on his help page. Some reviewers are so over-rejctionist that it is not unreasonable for someone to resubmit. I have accepted hundreds of them; I have also speedy deleted or sent to AfD for deletion an even higher number that should never have been accepted--some reviewers are insufficiently critical. I suggest that thinking for oneself is better than automatically doing anything. That's why we review by humans, not bots. In this particular case I don't think you're necessarily wrong, for notability is borderline and a stronger article would be better. Whether to accept borderline notability and let the article take its chances at AfD is sometimes a difficult decision. DGG ( talk ) 20:52, 19 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I should in addition mention that Techatology has been banned as one of a group of sockpuppets, and every one of their review will need reinvestigation.They seem to have started reviewing to review their own articles, and have apparently reviewed others in order to give an air of verisimilitude to what they were doing. DGG ( talk ) 02:10, 20 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. We're organizing an office hours session with the Teahouse to bring in mentors from across the wiki to try out Snuggle and discuss it's potential to support mentorship broadly. The Snuggle team would appreciate it if you would come and participate in the discussion. We'll be having it in #wikimedia-office ^connect on Wed. July 17th @ 1600 UTC. See the agenda for more info. --EpochFail^{(talk • work)}, Technical 13 (talk), TheOriginalSoni (talk) 18:28, 12 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, LukeSurl/archive5. Your question has been answered at the Teahouse Q&A board. Feel free to reply there!
Please note that all old questions are archived after 2-3 days of inactivity. Message added by Miss Bono ^[zootalk] 15:37, 1 August 2013 (UTC). (You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{teahouse talkback}} template.[reply]

LukeSurl.

Thank you for your contributaions to this article like grouping references. However, I'm going to have to undo your latest revision where you removed an image of Peter Capaldi. Please leave this image. It's good if we have at least one image of him.

Thank you again, Crazyboy279. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Crazyboy279 (talk • contribs) 21:28, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Crazyboy279 - the problem is with the license. The stated fair use rationale of the image is that it is of the character and is irreplaceable. However as Capaldi has not yet portrayed the Doctor such an image literally cannot yet exist, this is simply a picture of Capaldi which we could replace with free content. We would need to remove the image (and delete it) and use a free image of Capaldi, such as File:Peter_Capaldi.jpg (though this should probably not go in the infobox) --LukeSurl ^{t c} 21:33, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

— Preceding unsigned comment added by LukeSurl (talk • contribs) 22:40, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

LukeSurlI'm sorry LukeSurl, I made some mistake. I will allow this file to be deleted.

Thanks again for your contributation, Crazyboy279 ^{t c} 22:42, 4 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Could you help to add news with this source or with the other sources? [1] Sorry my English isn't perfect. i'm studying it --Many baks (talk) 15:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The AFC Backlog Buster Barnstar
	Congratulations, LukeSurl! You're receiving The Working Man's Barnstar because you reviewed 81 articles during the recent AFC Backlog elimination drive! Thank you for you contributions to Wikipedia at-large and helping to keep the backlog down. We hope you continue reviewing submissions and stay in touch at the talk page. Thank you and keep up the good work! Mdann52 (talk) 17:10, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the brownie Luke - it made my day! And thanks for your help with the article - I'm sorry I hadn't done the references properly but it was past midnight here in New Zealand by the time I finished with the article and I find some of the technical stuff confusing even when I'm not falling asleep! (I'll try that reflinks thing next time though!) It's always good to see someone that's not well-known in the English-speaking world get posted. I just wanted to say as well how impressed I've been with you. ITN, though I enjoy it, can be a bit prone to wiki-drama, but you're always so sensible and do great work updating items that provide some more diversity in what we post. I was just thinking the other day what a great administrator you would make. Neljack (talk) 01:35, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• *blush* Thanks dude. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:09, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	Great Answer Badge
	Awarded to those who have given a great answer on the Teahouse Question Forum. A good answer is one that fits in with the Teahouse expectations of proper conduct: polite, patient, simple, relies on explanations not links, and leaves a talkback notification. Earn more badges at: Teahouse Badges
In addition to giving feedback on good sourcing habits, you did some legwork and were able to point out issues regarding COI and advised an editor not to work on the article in question. Your firm, but polite advice is valuable because it saves everyone involved a lot of trouble and helps new users understand what Wikipedia is not. I, Jethrobot drop me a line (note: not a bot!) 21:33, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are invited to join the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC Reviewer permission. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 08:25, 24 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm contacting you about a study that I'm running with TheOriginalSoni exploring newcomer mentorship activities in Wikipedia. I'd like to ask you a few questions about your interactions with newcomers and to explore how a tool like WP:Snuggle might make your work easier. The interview and demo session will take 30 minutes to an hour depending on how much time we spend discussing things. If you're interested, let me know. If not, disregard this message and I won't bother you again.

• Study overview: meta:Research:Peer_mentorship_and_snuggle
• Consent form: meta:Research:Peer_mentorship_and_snuggle/Consent

Thanks for your consideration. --EpochFail (talk • contribs) 15:42, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luke, I saw that you use ShareMap maps in some articles. If you need any assistance with ShareMap please let me know.

Meanwhile if you can I will be very happy if you can add your support in this discussion: meta:Talk:Interwiki_map#ShareMap

We opened request of adding ShareMap to list of sites that are available using Interwiki links, and any support voice is warmly welcome (you can add your comment or just I support or +1). We believe that adding ShareMap to interwiki will make linking easier.

I will be also very happy if you can add yourself to the list of ShareMap users here : commons:User_talk:ShareMap/ShareMap_users

We are applying for Wikimedia Foundation grant and we need to prove that people are really using ShareMap to enrich their articles.

Thanks

--Jkan997 (talk) 22:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I declined the move of Words with Friends to Words With Friends because the lower-case "with" is more usual for English capitalization; see WP:NCCAPS. Furthermore, although the game's publisher Zynga often uses a capital "With" in the game's title, it doesn't always do so; see http://company.zynga.com/games/words-friends for an example. "Words with Friends is a leading social mobile game challenging players to create the highest-scoring words while playing against family and friends. Players can be engaged in up to 20 games at once and are able to chat with each other in game. In Apple’s App Store for iPhone, Words with Friends has regularly been the leading game in the word category since 2010 until Hanging with Friends became the leading game in June 2011. Words with Friends was acquired through our purchase of Newtoy, Inc. By leveraging our scale, technology infrastructure and deep knowledge of social game mechanics, we were able to double the DAUs for Words with Friends within approximately 120 days after the acquisition." --Metropolitan90 (talk) 05:17, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• OK. Thanks for your diligence. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 08:09, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 September 2013, In the news was updated with an item that involved the article IPCC Fifth Assessment Report, which you recently nominated and substantially updated. If you know of another recently created or updated article suitable for inclusion in ITN, please suggest it on the candidates page.

--NW (Talk) 14:21, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Re your note at Wikipedia:In the news/Candidates: Just so you'll know, laughingstock is one word; otherwise, you'd have a stock that was laughing. Sca (talk) 14:14, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I am sorry for troubling you but I wish to highlight that one of my submissions at Articles for Creation is pending review and has yet to be reviewed despite such a long period of time. It is Wikipedia_talk:Articles_for_creation/Zhang_Zetian. I submitted the page three times and from the day I started the Afc talk page to 29 September 2013 (third submission), it is almost one month. Till now, no reviewers seem to have reviewed the page.

Please help to review if you have the time. Thanks!

124.197.123.242 (talk) 07:25, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

List of incidents of animal sexual abuse no more breaches the policy of WP:BLPCRIME anymore. So what you think? OccultZone (talk) 12:02, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It still covers non-notable individuals and non-notable events. I agree with Stalwart111's comment: "None of the "entries" are likely to pass WP:EVENT or WP:CRIME and Wikipedia doesn't exist to cover every news story, nor does it exist to provide a directory of non-notable alleged criminal acts." For lists with indefinite numbers of entries such as this, only notable entries should be added, i.e. those involving a subject with their own article. None of the items on the list would remain with such a filter. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:08, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

But then Human–animal marriage can be deleted too, because it includes only 1 notable case, which has it's own article here. OccultZone (talk) 12:23, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, quite possibly so. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:43, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As you previously participated in related discussions you are invited to comment at the discussion at Wikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creation/RfC for AfC reviewer permission criteria. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 05:44, 18 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

This user's request to have autoblock on their IP address lifted has been reviewed by an administrator, who accepted the request.

LukeSurl (block log • active blocks • global blocks • contribs • deleted contribs • filter log • creation log • change block settings • unblock • checkuser (log))

2620:0:862:1:a6ba:dbff:fe38:fae1 (talk · contribs · (/64) · deleted contribs · filter log · WHOIS · RBLs · http · block user · block log)

---

Block message:

Autoblocked because your IP address was recently used by "NoahS24fgtp". The reason given for NoahS24fgtp's block is: "Spambot".

• Blocking administrator: Elockid (talk • blocks)

---

Accept reason: I've cleared the autoblock. There appears to be a glitch in the system. See Wikipedia:Village pump (technical)/Archive 119#Wikimedia Foundation IP addresses causing autoblocks. Elockid ^(Talk) 19:55, 6 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Brilliant Idea Barnstar
	For substitution template Herald talk with me 13:04, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators. Beeblebrox (talk) 19:32, 11 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luke,

Thank you very much for taking the time to have a look at my submission and provide feedback and links on how to improve my article.

I have been reading your guidelines for reference which you linked and I seem to be abiding by the guidelines on sites... It says to use independent websites like magazines and blogs rather than youtube or soundcloud. I have now removed the one reference that doesn't come under that category and the information connected with it. RapReviews.com and Rago Magazine are prominent online sources of news about the hip hop community.

I am confused about the 'verifiability' link.

"A musician or ensemble (note that this includes a band, singer, rapper, orchestra, DJ, musical theatre group, instrumentalist, etc.) may be notable if it meets at least one of the following criteria: Has been the subject of multiple, non-trivial, published works appearing in sources that are reliable, not self-published, and are independent from the musician or ensemble itself.[note 1] This criterion includes published works in all forms, such as newspaper articles, books, magazine articles, online versions of print media, and television documentaries"

The link from Rago Magazine which is a lengthy interview should surely meet the criteria as that is a UK Magazine in print and that was an online version of an official version — Preceding unsigned comment added by Robertjeffries29 (talk • contribs) 01:00, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Robertjeffries29. The key word here is "multiple". While Rago Magazine is a reliable source, it is just one. The other sources cited are fairly "low level" entities. In these situations we try and determine the total "weight" of the cited references, based on the sources' notability and how in depth they are about the article's subject. In this case it didn't seem sufficient to me. It may be a case of waiting a few months until Parameters comes out and we'll see how that is received. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 12:08, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The notability of this article (Wikipedia talk:Articles for creation/Billy Monk (criminal)) resides in the fact he is the last person in the US to die for a non-lethal kidnapping

This fact make this article remains among the articles about James Coburn (last robber and non-murderer to be executed), Ronald Wolfe (last rapist to die), Leonard Shockley (last juvenile), James French (last pre-Furman electrocution) and other articles whose subjects were the last to be executed in their categories (yes, I know about Wikipedia:Other stuff exists but these precedents establishe the notability of this article). --Jean Po (talk) 14:30, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've asked for a second opion on this. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 14:37, 14 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You are receiving this notice because you have commented or contributed to the article previously. Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl is currently undergoing a Featured Article Candidate review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl/archive1. I would invite anyone interested in going by, looking at the article, and if inclined, adding your comments. Regards. GregJackP Boomer! 19:52, 15 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Davidwr has given you a brownie! Brownies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a brownie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. This delicious treat is your reward for not two but three accepted articles through the AFC process, Segal–Bargmann space, Dirofilaria Tenuis, and Learning Resource Server Medicine. See also: [2]. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)†[reply]

Here is some feedback:

You should have declined Dirofilaria Tenuis and invited the contributor to merge the contents with the existing article Dirofilaria tenuis. I have merged the text and requested a history merge. I have also edited the text to use the proper lowercase lettering. After the history merge is done, please double-check my work, I might have missed something. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Learning Resource Server Medicine is hurt by the fact that most of the references are from a person who works at the institution that sponsors this project. I've noted it on the talk page and added {{primary sources}}. davidwr/(talk)/(contribs) 01:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Luke, just a note about why sometimes there isn't a lot of obvious information about particular blocks. The blocks you referred to were marked as "checkuserblock-account", which is explained in more detail here. Hope this clears things up a little. Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 16:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Blackberry Sorbet: OK, thanks for the info. --LukeSurl ^{t c} 16:27, 19 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Spring viraemia of carp, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Guppies (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:15, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Luke, I noticed this and fixed the link. Enjoy your break, see you in 2014! Blackberry Sorbet (talk • contribs) 11:24, 21 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]