User talk:Quadzilla99

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents 1 A little question 2 FAR 3 Jints template 4 Template: Maintained 5 NYG GA 6 Michael Jordan 7 Bongo Antelope 8 Great job 9 Michael Jordan FA 10 Characters of Final Fantasy VIII 11 Barnstar 12 Belated thank you 13 Editing 14 Thanks... 15 John Lester 16 RE: Uh-oh 17 RE: Refs on Minority Report 18 George Stuart Patterson 19 MJ 20 Hideaway (film) 21 Re:Good luck! 22 Shareef Abdur-Rahim 23 Super Bowl years

[edit] A little question

Hey I'm a little disappointed. I gave you that barnstar and you archived your talk page. I wanted everybody to see it, lol. Considering your fine work, do you have any interest in the Sopranos? It needs work and I'm about to start working on it tomorrow. Would you be interested in helping? Aaron Bowen 01:38, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Funny you would ask me, I'm actually a big fan of the Sopranos and am looking forward to April. However, I have a lot of other projects started here such as Lawrence Taylor and Hakeem Olajuwon whose articles I'm trying to bring to FA status. I just got their autobiographies and some other books on them and am reading them for some info right now. I'm also busy maintaining the articles on my user page and am going to try to bring Minority Report (film) and some other articles up to GA status. All that's assuming the MJ FAC keeps going so well. So I'm too busy to really help sorry. It's a shame I saw it before and remembered thinking how poor it is, it'd be nice to have it FA worthy or even on the front page for the series finale. As for your barnstar it's right here, thanks again. Quadzilla99 01:54, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Ah fair enough, just so everybody knows, I gave Quad the barnstar because he is the main contributor to the Michael Jordan article and almost single handedly made it into where it is now. Which is breezing through FAC and on it's way to being an FA. Aaron Bowen 02:49, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, it was a ton of work. The FAC was grueling (and I mean grueling, 130kbs grueling) After it was reset everything has been going smoothly, so far. Quadzilla99 02:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I added a maintained by the on the article's talk page since you've done so much work on it, if that's a problem just take it off. Aaron Bowen 09:05, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] FAR

Marskell is making concrete suggestions for trimming B movie, and hopefully work will finally get under way; since I'm still trying to travel (caught in a snowstorm), I'm wondering if you want to have a fresh look at Wikipedia:Featured article review/B movie. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:27, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

I don't know - I think it's already overtime. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:52, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Jints template

That's fine. Looks good.—DCGeist 20:35, 17 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Template: Maintained

I replied to your comment about Template:Maintained on its talk page. --24fan24 (talk) 02:42, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] NYG GA

I just promoted the page to GA. The way I saw it, it was a good page and didn't deserve to be waiting on the GAC list for so long. See that page for my minor problems, though. And sorry about the templates thing. The problem was that one of the refs was appearing weird on the bottom of the page, so I tried the templates to see if they would work, but it turns out, I was actually fixing the wrong ref! I've always used the templates, and probably always will, but I just wanted to let you know I wasn't trying to make a statement or anything.

And by the way, I just nominated two articles for GA (the ones that were right above yours on the sports section. If you have the time, maybe you could check one of those over (and my passing your article shouldn't mean anything, it's just a suggestion...). Thanks. _└^Jared_┘^┌_talk^┐  03:44, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks I put a lot of work into that article, it's part of a series of Giants history articles I'm working on. I added the fair use rationals. If I have time I'll look into your articles, it's been a while since I've done a GAC so might be fun. Quadzilla99 03:48, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Jordan

i know the article is well on the way to FA, but i left some queries on the MJ talkpage. i am not entirely sure if my queries are legitimate, but perhaps if you could see if they make sense. (as if you hadn't had enough of the article already heh). Chensiyuan 15:52, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

No, I'm definitely happy to answer any questions on the article. No problem. Quadzilla99 21:10, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Bongo Antelope

Hi there, Thanks for your suggestions on the fac status of the Bongo article. I've addressed many issues (apart from the inline referencing - if possible can you help with this as I'm new & have difficulty with the way to do that). Please can you look it over again? Thanks, Black Stripe 01:36, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Great job

I usually don't have the time or desire to work an article to FA (or even GA) status, but it always amazes me to see someone do it on a page I have on my watchlist. Great work. Great persistence. --Onorem 01:19, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Michael Jordan FA

I just noticed that the article had been promoted. Congratulations! Abecedare 01:21, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, your copyediting was vital by the way. Quadzilla99 01:22, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Characters of Final Fantasy VIII

Hi. I took cave of the image situation a bit, adding a couple screenshots and FMV captures. However, at 20 images, I think it's going to test the limits of the fair use haters at FAC. Any other thoughts about the article? — Deckiller 04:43, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I responded best I could given my relative lack of knowledge in the videogaming field. Quadzilla99 05:33, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback. — Deckiller 05:47, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Barnstar

		The Resilient Barnstar
		I, Onomatopoeia, give you the Resilient Barnstar for tirelessly improving Michael Jordan into a featured article, using a huge FAC discussion to your benefit. I also want to mention you also shaped MJ from B-level into a good article before. I now proudly add barnstar nr. 6 to your collection!

Thanks a lot. Quadzilla99 08:30, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Belated thank you

Thank you for the RickK Barnstar, it is very much appreciated.  :-) Can't sleep, clown will eat me 19:36, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Editing

Quad - I need to bring up your editing style because I want us to be on the same page, as we both are working to improve the Giants page. First, you gutted the Giants logo/uni section - fine, the new page is a better place for uniform minutiae. Then, you re-did the remnant with several inacurracies, grammatical mistakes, and spelling errors. Then, when I tried to fix the inaccuracies and the errors, you arbitrarily made new parapgraphs and broke some longer sentences into repeat simple sentences. Now, while I see you don't like single-sentence paragraphs or sentences with too many clauses, normal 2+ sentence paragraphs should follow the basic rules of paragraphs, i.e., they present a cogent point or thought within the paragraph. When a new point is introduced, the writer may start a new paragraph. Now I am going back to the Giants page and parsing the uniform/logo paragraphs - as an aside, if you think uniforms are trivial, why are you even concerned with that section? The rest of the page is in dire need of attention: I'll take care of the uniform patch of turf, free of charge. Cheers, 808 16:36, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Responded on your talk page. Please don't take any changes to an article you work on personally and attack them, assume Good Faith. Quadzilla99 16:44, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Thanks...

...for both your message and your specific, productive observations and suggestions during the process. In the end, I'm happy about the FAR--it got the article down from monstrously long to merely...uh...remarkably long. I'm also glad that after Jayzel and I really got off on the wrong foot with each other back in January, that we were able to reach not only an understanding but agreement on the article. The Jordan piece looks great, by the way. Best, Dan.—DCGeist 20:26, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] John Lester

Thanks for looking at the article, Quadzilla. I've attempted to fix the violation you noted. Let me know if looks good. --Eva ^bd 14:10, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

Perfect, like I said it was a minor thing. Nice work on the article. Quadzilla99 14:11, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Uh-oh

Sock blocked.¤~Persian Poet Gal ^(talk) 23:53, 24 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] RE: Refs on Minority Report

Hello Quadzilla99! I was fixing references according to the guidelines. Most of your citations were either before punctuation marks or had a space in between. I did not try to change the style.--Crzycheetah 05:30, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Every single one of them was located after punctuation:[1] I think you misunderstood the guidelines the punctuation refers to the punctuation in the text. As I said I went through a prolonged process formatting the refs on Michael Jordan, and they were deemed correct according to every guideline and looked over by SandyGeorgia who knows more about ref formatting than probably anyone on here. Also you clearly changed the entire style from a manual one to the template technique. Like I said I'm not going to move them back, just be aware that many editors don't like templates. I'm mostly telling you this so in the future you don't change the style of an article's ref formatting and upset future editors without discussing it first. Quadzilla99 05:43, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Please take a look at what I have done: [2]. I have not changed your reference format. I just changed "<ref></ref>," to ",<ref></ref>". That's it. --Crzycheetah 05:56, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

OK, I have found the problem. User:Igordebraga, not me, has changed your reference format, take a look here.

That's my bad I totally screwed up. If you look at the version I was referring to it was formatted properly:[3] Another editor added the templates and messed up the punctuation placement. I apologize he didn't mention refs in his edit summary. I assumed it was you. Please forgive my error. Quadzilla99 06:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Well, sorry, I'm a person that likes organization, that's why I put those templates. But I only made those changes because I thought the article was fine, and with some work could get to the GA (which is why I also improved the "Production" section and added box office, an award summary, and after the nom, the story-film comparison after some research). Anyway, since you were in charge of the article before, well, that was a good job. And good luck with the themes... BTW, there was a "stub" of that before[4] igordebraga ≠ 14:50, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

I'm not in charge of the article. Sorry if it came off that way. I just wanted to make sure you were aware of the policy like I said. I'm not the only who doesn't like the templates, and as WP:CITET says "Because they are optional, editors should not change articles from one style to another (template to manual e.g.) without consensus." Even still I didn't revert them. Quadzilla99 14:57, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] George Stuart Patterson

Thanks for looking at George. I've not been able to find any more info about his early life. I just checked a couple books out of the library which will hopefully contain more info. I've also tried to polish the language you requested. Thanks for the reviews.--Eva ^bd 14:42, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] MJ

Just dropping by to congratulate you. You hung in there! --Dweller 15:00, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Ta! I've got Ipswich Town F.C. at FAC at the moment. Norwich City F.C. will be next, but it's not even ready for Peer Review yet! --Dweller 15:21, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Hideaway (film)

On 27 March 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hideaway (film), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page.

--howcheng {chat} 19:46, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Re:Good luck!

Thank you very much. I hope everything will run smoothly. =) Nishkid64 20:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Shareef Abdur-Rahim

Thanks for volunteering to look at it! Chensiyuan 22:27, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Super Bowl years

The whole thing is confusing, see Wikipedia:WikiProject National Football League#Naming conventions basically because non-fans get confused the playoffs and Super Bowl should be referred to by the calendar year the occur in. Also indiivdual years should not be wikilinked in Wikipedia. Pleased don't get mad at me neither decision is my choice. You could probably ask for further clarification on the talk page over at WP:NFL. Maybe I'm not 100% correct but I'm pretty sure that's the correct format. It's confusing—the Chicago Bears and New England Patriots articles are considered featured articles and could be used as examples. Maybe we could just say they won Super Bowl XXI and XXV without mentioning the year. They are mentioned again in the section with the year mentioned. Quadzilla99 14:32, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I have followed the ongoing discussion on the confusion on the season vs. year-played, especially surrounding the 20xx-yy NFL Playoffs articles. Keeping that in mind, I was trying to distinguish the parenthetical year to a season by linking them to the applicable NFL season article. (As you say, the wikilink to 1986 serves no purpose.) Factoring in the above, I reviewed the context in which it fell into. Since the section referred to "season...season...season," I felt that rigid application of style would force a rewrite for this paragraph. Perhaps the hardest part of style is knowing when not to apply it.

All of that said, the article (in its current state) would be better served by not listing the Super Bowl year or season (one can find both in a single click). This is consistent with your conclusion. I would not be opposed to a future version of the article wikilinking the years to ---- NFL season or New York Giants ---- season'. Thanks for the input. —Twigboy 14:59, 29 March 2007 (UTC), formerly of the top row of Section 315.

Basically I just formatted like I suggested on your talk page, it's fine now. Quadzilla99 15:05, 29 March 2007 (UTC)