User talk:OhanaUnited

; Archives
	Archive 1 (December 18, 2006 - May 31, 2007)
	Archive 2 (June 1, 2007 - July 3, 2007)
	Archive 3 (July 4, 2007 - August 21, 2007)

Talk page after mainspace page got moved

Hello, thanks for your help on AWB. I have yet to try that as I'm quite busy both in real life (aka sleeping lol) and Wikipedia. Anyways, I came upon an article that its mainspace page got merged into another article but the talk page remains (take a look at Talk:African Wild Dog name controversy). What can I do to assess it? It looks stupid to assess it when it is now merged into another article. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} —The preceding signed but undated comment was added at 11:02, August 20, 2007 (UTC).

Don't assess talk pages of redirected articles. Redirect them to the appropriate talk page (the talk page of the main article):

African Wild Dog name controversy --> African Wild Dog

Talk:African Wild Dog name controversy --> Talk:African Wild Dog

Firsfron of Ronchester 03:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Toronto Meetup

Yes, I've seen and commented. I don't see what needs to be done, apart from someone taking the bull by the horns and making it happen. WilyD 13:45, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Victoria Cross (Canada)

May i ask why did you delist this as a GA. Surely the correct procedure would have been to put it up at Wikipedia:Good article review? or at least contact the nominator with your concerns. With regards to the references, the $3000 is cited very adequately from the Government statuate within the article itself. From my experience at WP:FAC there is no need to cite things in the lead that are in the article unless they are highly contentious or if they ar BLPs. Given that this is part of a FT candidate would it not have been courteous to alert me? What specifically do you think it needs to meet GA again. Thanks Woodym555 16:00, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

With regards to the FT, those articles that can meet GA or FA (i.e. not lists etc) must be a GA or FA. It is currently stuck because there are not enough FAs in it let alone GAs. Beyond that i don't see any reviewers concerns. Flubecas concerns were acted upon, the images Giggy was worried about were removed altogether. The main concern that i can see is the furore that this articles promotion created inside the Good article project. I can't see how i can act upon concerns over its promotion, that aspect was out of my hands. Do i have to list it at WP:GA/R to understand what is needed for it to be promoted? Thanks Woodym555 17:58, 21 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I understand that editor review is for general comments and is not an RFA. In that vein i have slightly refactored my comments but only slightly. The general problem still stands. I have now listed Victoria Cross (Canada) for GA review. Let me finish by saying i do understand your actions and i am thankful for your efforts at maintaining quality throughout the GA drive, i just think that the correct processes should have been followed when delisting it. Just because it was not promoted in the best possible manner does not mean it should be delisted in a poor manner as well. Thanks Woodym555 10:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Auerbach

I just saw that you took down Red Auerbach for GA flimsy pretext.

OK, you put your concerns on the talk page, OK, but that is the LEAST visible part. You
neither went through the Wikipedia:Good article review. It NEVER listed on the WP:GA/R page
neither contacted WP:NBA, the main WikiProject
neither contacted me, User:Onomatopoeia, as the main author

This is just bad faith editing, sorry. I just saw you are on Wikipedia:Editor_review/OhanaUnited, and I full concur with Chensiyuan. I may be personally invested, OK, but this is just pulling a fast one. Unilateral, absolutely INSUFFICIENT enforcement of WP:GA/R, point 4 (allow other editors to respond -- how should we know if you only drop 2 lines and contact NO ONE?), very flimsy pretext. On a constructive note, I will address your concerns on the Auerbach page. —Onomatopoeia 11:44, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Red Auerbach, part 2

On a constructive note, I just addressed you concerns on Red Auerbach. BTW, User:T Rex (who you may know) had this say on the WP:GAC talk page: "No he (i.e. you, OhanaUnited) was completely wrong in trying to remove it without consensus as well as according to you, trying to hide the fact that he did that. It should probably be restored to GA and taken to WP:GA/R immediately. T Rex | talk 12:30, 22 August 2007 (UTC)" —Onomatopoeia 12:54, 22 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

The opinion of one editor who participates in the candidacy reviews side of the project is not something to be throwing in his face on his talk page regarding action taken as part of the Good article backlog elimination drive for which he is the coordinator, also considering everyone is spitting bad faith assumptions before getting the full story, which is that his delistment was on my recommendation. Lara ♥Love 15:26, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Sweeps

I was hoping to get your participation, no matter how little or much you are able, in the GA sweeps (reviewing all listed articles to ensure quality). I'd also like your opinion on how best to achieve the goal. Personally, I prefer participation in this particular task be by invitation only. As was made evident by the backlog elimination drive, not all reviewers can be trusted to give a thorough review. For that reason, I would like only experienced, trusted reviewers to participate in this. What do you think?

In unrelated news, you need to archive your talk page! Just say the word, and I'll do it. Copy-editor, task force creator, and archivist Lara ♥Love 05:06, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Archimedes

Thank you for your comments on Archimedes. The article has undergone a good deal of work recently and may be nominated as a FAC soon. --♦IanMacM♦ ^{(talk to me)} 18:11, 23 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Don't do it!

No! Stay! You're a great editor, we need more people like you. Please! G iggy\^Talk 06:33, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would also ask that you don't leave. I think the quality of articles has to be maintained and you are doing a fantastic job at maintaining that quality. The recent problems over the Red Auerbach article and the VC (Canada) article were caused over lack of coimmunication with the main conrtibutors. I cannot speak for onamatoepia but i was disheartened by the lack of communication with the main contributors. As you said, they were peoples favourite articles that they have spent time building up and maintaining. They only want what is best for the articles. I really hope that you don't leave and that you build on this rather tumultuous experience. In the end the Victoria Cross (Canada) article has improved a lot beacuse of this whole incident, something that wouldn't have happened for a while yet, if you had not have got involved. I apologise if it seemed i was getting on your back, that was not my intention at all. Woodym555 12:18, 25 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

another GA drive?

Since you were one of the main people behind the July 2007 backlog elimination drive, I thought I'd let you know that I've started a new proposal for a longer, three-month GA review drive, that would run from September 1 through November 30. The aim here would be to draw new reviewers to the GA project and to keep the backlog down. I've made a couple of minor modifications to the rules and awards structure from the July drive. The proposal can be viewed here. Any help you'd like to offer would be appreciated! Dr. Cash 00:50, 27 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

AfD nomination of Thornlea Secondary School

An article that you have been involved in editing, Thornlea Secondary School, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Thornlea Secondary School. Thank you. GreenJoe 18:42, 28 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Toronto Meetup

TORONTO MEETUP NOTICE
	Hello OhanaUnited, Toronto Meetup is good to go! Location: Ferret & Firkin Date: Saturday, September 1, 2007 Time: 1 PM. If you have any question or comments, please leave them here Regards, nat^tang 00:32, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia Study

Hey OhanaUnited,

Thanks for your message! I'd love to have you participate, but as I'm getting close to my thesis deadline now (October) we'd need to move quickly :-)

I'm interview people via email on their thoughts regarding the WikiP community and related issues. The interviews are via email and in 3 parts.

If you still want to jump on in, please send me an email ([email protected]) and we can get started!

cheers, tamsin 11:22, 29 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Bio Assessment Drive

Just a friendly note, but someone DID make it to 10k. :) It's all good. Wizardman and I just wanted to prove you wrong, but it did drive us to get more done, so it's all good. ludahai 魯大海 04:36, 30 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Rollback request

Hey, I think I come upon 2 sockpuppets trying to advertise/promote Eastman Chemical Company (see history for details). I tried to revert all the edits but unnecessary due to conflict edits. I ask if you could rollback the page, thanks. OhanaUnited ^{Talk page} 02:05, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ohana,

Rollback is just a fast way of undoing what one editor has done. It doesn't allow you to rollback more than one editor's work, so rollback isn't possible in this instance. The best way to clean up this article is to go into the history of the article, find the last good version, edit that version, and hit 'save page'. Firsfron of Ronchester 14:19, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Gerry McNamara

Hi there. I was hoping you could take a look at Gerry McNamara and let me know what you think needs to be improved. I've noticed you've participated in a lot of articles that have been bumped up to "Good Article" status (though I am by no means nominating the article for GA), so I wanted an outside opinion. Thanks. Chengwes 20:43, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking at the article. I made all of the suggested changes, with the exception of moving up the 'personal' section. Where do you suggest I move it to? Chengwes 23:54, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's great to hear. I hope to work with you more in the future. Chengwes 05:06, 2 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]