Jump to content

User talk:Jezhotwells: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
DASHBot (talk | contribs)
m Removing fair use file(s), per WP:NFCC#9 (Shutoff | Log )
Line 141: Line 141:


{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
{| style="background-color: #fdffe7; border: 1px solid #fceb92;"
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[File:Dixie Brown.jpg|95px]]
|rowspan="2" style="vertical-align: middle; padding: 5px;" | [[:File:Dixie Brown.jpg|95px]]<!--Non free file removed by DASHBot-->
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Congratulations!'''
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 3px 3px 0 3px; height: 1.5em;" | '''Congratulations!'''
|-
|-

Revision as of 05:01, 30 July 2011

Featured Article promotion

Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Harold Pinter a Featured Article! Your work is much appreciated.

Thanks also for your reviews. Featured article candidates and Good Article nominees always need more reviewers! All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Thank you! Jezhotwells (talk) 15:45, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

May I add my congratulations? You applied yourself indefatigably to turning the article from an unreadable pseudo-academic bog into a very fine and user-friendly encyclopaedia article. Such a shame that the earlier major contributor couldn't get the point of Wikipedia and share in the credit, but heigh ho! Your work on the article over many weeks – indeed months – has been exemplary, and I applaud! Tim riley (talk) 16:57, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations on the article's promotion. Let me also take moment to thank you for your generous, thoughtful and skillful reviews of GA nominations and your GARs, which do much to promote the quality of this encyclopedia. Happy editing! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:41, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congratulations Jezhotwells! Harold would have been proud of the stamina you have displayed in pushing this brilliant, and still troublesome writer, uphill all the way to Parnassus. Mick gold (talk) 16:49, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you, thank you, thank you! BTW, Mick there seems to have been a dearth of Dylan articles to review recently! :-) Jezhotwells (talk) 16:54, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, work has run me over for the last few months (not a bad thing) but I have been beavering away (with others) on Blonde On Blonde. Mick gold (talk) 18:13, 20 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Global Blue article

Hi, I have rewritten the article and believe that the warning for advertisement can now be deleted. I have tried to write it objectively. What do you think? If you think that I am on the right track, please delete your remark.

Thanks, Brownjane (talk) 20:17, 19 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Nothing there to establish notability, I have nominated for deletion at WP:AfD. Discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Global Blue. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:14, 21 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Apparently the media do not think that there is nothing notable about Global Blue...It is a good thing that the article is under scrutiny during the nomination for deletion. So far, it seems that quite a few contributors believe that Global Blue is a notable company....I have tried my best and am fairly new as a contributor. I trust that other contributors will defend the article that I have put a lot of time and research in. Anyways, thanks for your feedback. Brownjane (talk) 21:55, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Play redirects

I've noticed you've been redirecting short stubs on plays into the main articles. Please don't. From what I gather most of these have articles on another wikipedia and can easily be expanded. I've reverted your redirect to La putta onorata and am going to revert every single redirect you've made. This is not a constructive attitude and your time would be much better spent expanding them. La putta onorata is a notable play.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:14, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the expand note has been on for a year or more on those articles. I am going through the 2,980+ unassessed articles and I have redirected only content-less stubs as is common practice where no referenced assertion of notability has been made. feel free to expand the articles mate, but as they are they serve little or not purpose. Jezhotwells (talk) 10:20, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Some of the plays though appear to be very notable. I'll try to add to a few, but not having a command of fluent Italian will make it difficult.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:47, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Notability isn't the question. It is stubs of the nature of Mobile Horror is a Finnish play. It was written by Juha Jokela., which need a redirect until someone can provide content. There are some 250+ of these, they can be un-redirected when there is content. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Don't forget to change the assessment on the talk page from "redirect" to "stub" or "start" as appropriate, if you expand them. Jezhotwells (talk) 13:19, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category question

Hi. I wondered if you give me an opinion on this. I see that you have posted to the WP:MAGAZINE talk page in the past, so I thought you might have some experience with these sorts of cats. Someone removed two categories here. This magazine is generally considered to be pretty political, using book reviews basically as a launching point for long essays, often about politics, although sometimes about literature and culture. I don't think the removal of the categories makes sense, but I wanted to get a second opinion. What do you think? -- Ssilvers (talk) 16:21, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I would be inclined to discuss on the talk page. I see that the editor didn't leave a summary, so you are justified in asking them to explain themselves. Jezhotwells (talk) 21:09, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I opened a discussion with him on his talk page. BTW, in the recent GA nomination about the play, the editor noted that there were at least three other GA-class plays without much of a plot section, and probably not much "background" or "analysis". I'm afraid that a bad precedent was set. I don't usually deal with plays (I mostly stick to musicals), but if you want to do anything about this, I'd be happy to assist in any way I can. All the best, -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:10, 22 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Dixie Brown

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

500 GAs reviewed!!

The Reviewers Award The Reviewers Award
In recognition of your astonishing and generous feat of reviewing 500 (!) Good Article Nominations, I hereby award you this Reviewer's barnstar. Your monumental contribution to the encyclopedia is much appreciated! -- Ssilvers (talk) 19:35, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much. Jezhotwells (talk) 19:45, 23 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Byrds

Hey, thanks for your hard work in undertaking The Byrds article GA review. I have worked very hard to get that article up to its current standard, so it's great to see it pass. I had absolutely no idea that someone had nominated it for a GA review. I was, of course, planning to nominate it myself before too long but was trying to source a few more images first...so I'm a bit peeved that some other editor has jumped in ahead of me, but I don't suppose it really matters one way or the other. Anyway, thanks again for taking the time to review the article and for taking the time to recognise that it wasn't the nominator who had done all the spade work on the article. Here, have a cookie! Kohoutek1138 (talk) 11:36, 24 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

K&A Canal at FAC

Thanks for your support & edits with this FAC so far. It currently has 4 "supports", however I have a potential problem coming up. I'm going to be on holiday with no internet access from Fri 29 July for at least a week. EdJogg is also going to be away. I have asked if there is any action I should take, but would you be willing to keep an eye on it and deal with any reviewers comments which arise while I'm away?— Rod talk 21:09, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sure thing Rod, I will do what I can. Enjoy your holiday. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

At PR if by any chance you were minded to look in... Tim riley (talk) 22:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, but I am not particularly knowledgeable about classical music. I will look tomorrow. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:12, 25 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 25 July 2011

Terri Schaivo Case

Are you going to be reviewing this for good article status?Ace-o-aces (talk) 22:17, 26 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I generally don't do repeat reviews. Jezhotwells (talk) 00:16, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]



Knowle West GA

Hi, I have made my initial review of Knowle West's GA nomination and put it on hold. There are a few points at Talk:Knowle West, Bristol/GA1 that need to be addressed before it can be passed. Other than those minor points the article looks great. Please feel free to contact me if there are any other questions and I will take another look at the article. Thanks! Jaguar (talk) 15:39, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, will take a look tomorrow. Jezhotwells (talk) 22:35, 27 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well done - Knowle West has been passed. Looks like another Bristol GA. Jaguar (talk) 09:11, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for the review. Jezhotwells (talk) 09:59, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your help

Thanks
Thank you for your help with the review of the Kennet and Avon Canal at FAC, which has just been promoted. — Rod talk 14:46, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Feedback?

Hello. I was wondering if you would like to provide feedback on Moonrise (Warriors), especially regarding what can be done in order to make it a featured article. Thank you, Brambleclawx 18:04, 28 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

You may receive opposition to some of the sourcing at FAC, specifically the blog, Bookloons and Writers Unboxed. Ref 17 needs a page number; Ref # needs volume, issue number, page number. Consistency in referencing will be examined very closely. Good luck! Jezhotwells (talk) 19:28, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. Brambleclawx 20:10, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What should I do if the page cited in ref 17 isn't numbered? (it's part of a characters list that occurs before the story itself, and the authors do not number them with i, ii, iii, etc.) Brambleclawx 20:26, 29 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! Well just explain that when/if challenged and ask what to do. Jezhotwells (talk) 01:07, 30 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article promotion

95px Congratulations!
Thanks for all the work you did in making Knowle West, Bristol a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated.

Thanks also for your reviews. Featured article candidates and Good Article nominees always need more reviewers! All the best, – Quadell (talk)