User talk:Ruhrfisch/Archive 37

Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will generally reply on your talk page. Although my email address is enabled, I do not check often (so I may be slow in replying to email and very much prefer to have conversations here). Please note that while I am glad to do a peer review on just about any article, it will often take me several days, and I do not have the time to do copyedits (sorry). If you want me to review an article, please open a peer review on it. Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Hawaii hotspot

You should check back on the PR, I've cut up a lot of your issues and started some intensive copyediting. As I see it the lead past the first para needs rewriting, modern studies needs work, and I still have to figure out what Avenue tells me I've missed. You know any good copyeditors I could enlist? On an unrelated note, I miss the little critters on your page. ResMar 04:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Oh and in terms of PRs I've done Wikipedia:Peer review/Atlantis: The Lost Empire/archive2 and Wikipedia:Peer review/Voluntary Human Extinction Movement/archive1. So that leaves one more. ResMar 04:08, 1 March 2012 (UTC)

Harvard Bridge revisit request

Some time has passed. A number of changes have been made. Would you please make a new review of this article? - Denimadept (talk) 00:44, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Please open a new peer review and I will comment on it. A very quick look shows the lead is still too short, and I saw at least one citation needed tag. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:56, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I added the {{cn}} today as a reminder to find out where I got that bit. - Denimadept (talk) 05:14, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I see no new peer review has yet been opened - that is where I will review it (as per my above statements). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:22, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Now that I've fixed the {{cn}}, I've added the peer review request. Thanks! - Denimadept (talk) 05:37, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Please see the following:

I have found two articles, both are orphans, and in at least one case, I question it's notability- Garo Gaboudagian. It is an orphan, has no sources, and no corresponding article in any other language Wikipedia. The second one, when I found it, was a mix of a photo of Chennai in India, and word-for-word text from the only source available in serious copyright violation. I left more commentary on the talk page for that one. Thanks for your help. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Ask a fish ...

Hi Ruhrfisch - I have a question, though not entirely sure you know the answer. Would you happen to know what the mucus skin (?) that surrounds a trout is called? I'm working on Hemingway's "Big Two-Hearted River" (a river page!) and the character's delicacy in releasing the fish without harm is an important point. Having spent my share of time blissfully waiting for a trout to bite, I understand how carefully fish must be released, but don't expect most people to know. Anyway, just fishing for an answer (sorry, very corny, but couldn't resist). Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:03, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

Chrisye

Hi Ruhrfisch, this is just to let you know that Chrisye (which you helped peer review) has been nominated at FAC. If you would like to participate in the discussion it would be appreciated. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

• I have replied at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Chrisye/archive1. Thank you for the review! Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:30, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Meyersdale, Pennsylvania

Meyersdale has some edits that need to be deleted. They are rude, crude, and vulgar. Gerry D (talk) 01:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

FA review of Rainilaiarivony

Hi Ruhrfisch. I have a level-4 vital Madagascar-related article up at FAC and it isn't attracting any attention. It's the biography of the last Prime Minister of the 19th century Kingdom of Madagascar, who carried the island to the modern age before being exiled by the conquering French colonial army. You always offer such helpful reviews. I'm hoping you'll take a look at it Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Rainilaiarivony here if you have a chance. Cheers, Lemurbaby (talk) 06:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)

• Thanks for all your comments, and for taking the time to read and review the article. The FA process has helped polish and strengthen it thanks to input like yours. I've responded to all your points - have a look when you can to see if you feel satisfied with the changes. Cheers, Lemurbaby (talk) 19:14, 29 March 2012 (UTC)

United States Bicentennial coinage

Hi, this one is back at FAC, you supported first time out. It failed through ennui last time, not though fault, hope you'll weigh in on the renewed effort here. Many thanks,--Wehwalt (talk) 09:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Steamtown GA

Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I have submitted Steamtown National Historic Site for GA review. I think it is ready. I removed the restoration section and put it on the talk page for discussion or improvement (because it was problematic and I think the only think keeping it from GA.). I would like to see us both get credit when this passes review. Take Care, --Ishtar456 (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I fixed the access dates. Thanks for the heads-up. I think we have a GA here. I had a lot of fun doing those articles and we both worked hard on this one. I just nominated Steamtown, USA for FA. This is the second time and they are brutal reviewers. Wish me luck.--Ishtar456 (talk) 16:44, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

I think I may have acted in haste. I just realized that the only section of the article that has citations is the history section. Do you have any idea where the rest of it came from? At first I thought it was from the nps website, but I don't see it there. I do not mind putting in the citations, but I have no idea where the information came from. All I could find was another website that was cut and pasted from Wikipedia. I think I might have to withdraw the nom. But if it is anything like my last nom. it will take a month before the review is started, so there maybe some time to fix it. Please let me know if you know where this came from.--Ishtar456 (talk) 17:31, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, McDade is in there in the Nationalization section. I do not think that the article is much good without the other sections. I did not want to have to rewrite it, but I will. I will try to get it done before the review. If I don't finish I will withdraw it. --Ishtar456 (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)

Some email

Hello, Ruhrfisch. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

IvoShandor (talk) 08:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Ernest Shackleton

This is a note to let the main editors of Ernest Shackleton know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 17, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 17, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Ernest Shackleton (1874–1922) was an Anglo-Irish polar explorer, one of the principal figures of the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration. His first experience of the polar regions was as third officer on Captain Robert Falcon Scott’s Discovery Expedition, 1901–04, from which he was sent home early on health grounds. Determined to make amends for this perceived personal failure, he returned to Antarctica in 1907 as leader of the Nimrod Expedition. In January 1909 he and three companions made a southern march which established a record Farthest South latitude at 88° 23′ S, 190 km from the South Pole. For this achievement, Shackleton was knighted by King Edward VII on his return home. After the race to the South Pole ended in 1912 with Roald Amundsen's conquest, Shackleton turned his attention to what he said was the one remaining great object of Antarctic journeying—the crossing of the continent from sea to sea, via the pole. To this end he made preparations for what became the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, 1914–17. Disaster struck this expedition when its ship, Endurance, became trapped in pack ice and was slowly crushed before the shore parties could be landed. There followed a sequence of exploits, and an ultimate escape with no lives lost, that would eventually assure Shackleton's heroic status. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks …

for peer reviewing Aalen, and I’ve put the FA backlog on my watchlist so I can help if any topic I’m familiar too appears there. --dealerofsalvation 16:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for The Doon School

My huge thanks to you for your invaluable suggestions for the Doon School page. I will take each of your points one at a time and work thoroughly on it. I'd just like to clarify one of the points - the info about Doon's network being second-most influential in 1990 after Harvard has the Economic Times (ET) reference because, in fact, it was mentioned by the ET in that article (mentioning the Economist). Though I'm still looking for a primary source and will add, when i find it. But, really, thanks very much Ruhrfisch for taking the time to review this article. I will work as advised. And also , probably, will come back to knock at your door when I've made the changes you've advised so that you can re-review it. Many thanks once again :) :: Merlaysamuel :: (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)

They were useful indeed. Working on them...thanks! :: Merlaysamuel :: (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Shackleton and Carmen

Thank you for watching the Shackleton article through its recent TFA. I was nervous about this, given the history of bickering and vandalism that has afflicted it recently, but all went reasonably well, and you handled a couple of points deftly on the talk page.

As to Carmen, can I possibly snatch a few minutes of your reviewing time and ask you to look over the image and soundfiles, and to note any possible issues on the article's peer review page? I don't think there is anything problematic, but I like to be sure. I have not been of much assistance on the PR backlog lately; I have been reviewing, but mainly at the requests of editors on articles that have not yet reached the backlog. I will try to make some inroads over the next few days, as I see it's over 20 again. Brianboulton (talk) 11:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

• I'm sorry to be a pest, but I am aiming to close the Carmen PR soon. Is ther any chance you could look over the media file in the next 24 hours? Brianboulton (talk) 22:43, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

British pound symbol

Hi, thanks for leaving the "£" symbol - I was not looking to enter into a edit war or looking to cause trouble!

Many thanks

Alphacatmarnie (talk) 11:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks for committing to the peer review of deep vein thrombosis. I did feed the peer review gods with comments at the Wikipedia:Peer review/Spinal stenosis/archive1, which was backlogged, but I hesitate to remove it from the backlog list because I didn't add the doing template before I started. Thanks again. Biosthmors (talk) 17:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Josephus on Jesus

This has been nominated for peer review by an editor who is not a significant contributor. It is clear from the talkpage that there is a content dispute in progress, involving this editor and the main authors. I have pointed out that in these circumstances a peer review is not really appropriate; I think it should be closed until the dispute is resolved. Would you mind looking at it? Brianboulton (talk) 00:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ahalya/archive2: Ahalya

Hi Ruhrfisch. After a failed FAC, Ahalya is back at FAC and again accused of the same problem of not having "the source material in accessible and coherent language". You have read many articles and given constructive criticism in several PRs. Can you please take a look and highlight the sentences that may suffer this issue on the FAC or talk (wherever it seems appropriate), whenever you get a chance? Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 18:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. Have replied. By any chance, do you do spotchecks? I have linked many online articles. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:46, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

No problem. No need for a sorry. Your help in the PR and improving the article is much appreciated. Thanks. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:59, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Carmen

Thanks for your comments on the peer review page. This is to let you know I have now closed the review, and nominated at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Chrisye

Just in case my notice above got buried, I'll double post. I've replied at the FAC. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Opinion requested

Could you look briefly at a couple of images, where I have some licencing concerns? They are:-

• File:RogerTichborne.jpg: I uploaded this myself and licenced it PD-art, which seems reasonable for a 150-year-old daguerrotype. But I am uncertain
• File:Thomas Castro's butcher shop sketch.jpg: This image was in the original version of the article Tichborne Case which I have expanded (it should be at PR soon). There seems no doubt the image is PD in Australia, but how should it be licenced as PD in the US? Could it be considered a work of art?

No particular hurry, but I would value your opinion. Brianboulton (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review of BGSU

Thanks for thePeer review of Bowling Green State University. I worked through the PR and the article and all the suggestions. Thanks for all your help and it is one step closer to GA status. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

A Beer for You

	Thanks for the Review
	Hi Ruhrfisch, thanks for the review at the recent FA nomination for Chrisye. Your prose edits helped tremendously, and the peer review you gave led me to further research this article. The result is the most complete English-language write-up on the singer in existence. In thanks, I'd like to give you a local brew: Bintang Beer. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

RE: Special:UnwatchedPages

Hey, finally someone graps what I mean, and the fact that we need to get it opened up. Have you any idea where we can take this to get the ball rolling? Mrlittleirish 13:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Tichborne Case

I have opened a PR page, since (thanks to TRM) the backlog is now of manageable size. I wonder, could you help me with one small aspect? I believe the correct title should be "Tichborne case" (small "c"), but when I tried the move, it was refused on the grounds that the title already existed, presumably in the form of a redirect. I think it requires admin action to effect the change in such circumstances. Brianboulton (talk) 14:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

Thanks again Ruhr, you have no idea how much that was appreciated. IvoShandor (talk) 23:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

	Ahalya says Thanks
	Thanks for helping the article improve to FA standards by your constructive comments on the PR ! --Redtigerxyz Talk 18:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Weissport

Weissport, Pennsylvania needs some attention. The edit is not supported by a google search except for the edit itself. Gerry D (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

Backlog, what backlog?

Hi Ruhrfisch, hope you're well. Looks like we managed to get the PR backlog down to zero... I wonder when that last happened! Hopefully I'll be able to keep knocking the odd PR out to support when the backlog reappears! On a related note, and I've read your talkpage message, but I was hoping one good turn might deserve another and that you might be kind enough to have a look at a PR on Little Boots that I've listed today? I'm hoping it's in reasonably good condition but of course, one often cannot see the wood for the trees, hence the request! Best wishes, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the comments so far. I'm out today but hopefully will be able to get to some of them this evening. Cheers, The Rambling Man (talk) 09:29, 27 April 2012 (UTC)

Tichborne case

Hi, you'll see I'm editing again. I have closed the Tichborne peer review and nominated the article at FAC. I think the current lead image is defendable, particularly after the minor cleanups; maybe a word or two from you would help if necessary.

Unfortunately, presumably because of the name move during the review, the PR system won't link to the archived review (see redlink on articl talkpage). It seems from the edit history you had some earlier trouble in this respect, but managed to fix it. Can you look at the current problem? Brianboulton (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

DVT

And thank you for the peer review to DVT. No problem about the delay. I think I've just finally adequately addressed the concerns that were raised. Biosthmors (talk) 05:43, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Philadelphia Museum of Art

Just in case you're not keeping busy, we've started a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums) project at Wikipedia:GLAM/Philadelphia Museum of Art. This should be exciting! Please sign up or contribute however you can.

Or check out Outreach.

In any case, it's good to say hello.

Smallbones (talk) 05:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Fanny Imlay

This is a note to let the main editors of Fanny Imlay know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 14, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 14, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Fanny Imlay (1794–1816) was the illegitimate daughter of the British feminist Mary Wollstonecraft and the American commercial speculator Gilbert Imlay. Although Mary Wollstonecraft and Gilbert Imlay lived together happily for brief periods before and after the birth of Fanny, Imlay left Wollstonecraft in France in the midst of the French Revolution. In an attempt to revive their relationship, she travelled to Scandinavia on business for him, taking the one-year-old Fanny with her, but the affair never rekindled. After falling in love with and marrying the philosopher William Godwin, Wollstonecraft died in childbirth in 1797, leaving the three-year-old Fanny in the hands of Godwin, along with the newborn Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin. Four years later, Godwin remarried and his new wife, Mary Jane Clairmont, brought children of her own into the marriage, most significantly from Fanny Imlay's and Mary Godwin's perspective, Claire Clairmont. Both girls resented the new Mrs Godwin and the attention she paid to her own daughter. The Godwin household became an increasingly uncomfortable place to live as tensions rose and debts mounted. Imlay became increasingly isolated from her family and committed suicide in 1816 at the age of 22.

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

RFC

Hi! I saw you've reviewed images at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murasaki Shikibu/archive1. Now I found the lead image was authentically incorrect, but Truthkeeper does not agree with me. It would be grateful if you could post your comment at Talk:Murasaki Shikibu#Wrong picture. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Sorry. I was told this was canvassing. I posted RFC at WT:FAC#RFC on Murasaki Shikibu. Regards. Oda Mari (talk) 16:24, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

TK

Thanks for that. Looked like a personal attack - here's another from a few days ago - [1]...Modernist (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

Nomination of Fanny Imlay for deletion

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fanny Imlay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fanny Imlay until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 14:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

Images

Would it be possible for you to look briefly at the images on A Child of Our Time and let me know if you can spot any problems? There are only five of them. I discussed the Bundesarchiv image used in the lead with User: Elcobbola, and he believes that it is fine as far as PD is concerned. The others should not be problematic. Brianboulton (talk) 14:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

FLRC

I have nominated List of Pennsylvania state parks for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

I won't be able to help with this. I am sure you'll be able to save it. I simply no longer have the time to devote to anything other than watchlist monitoring on Wikipedia. Gerry D (talk) 15:45, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

A cup of tea for you!

Thank you for the comprehensive and helpful advice you gave at Wikipedia:Peer review/Chikaraishi/archive1. I'll address the issues you raised straight away. Yunshui 雲‍水 09:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

Your free 1-year HighBeam Research account is ready

Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.

• The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
• To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1
• If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi. Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
• A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate. Examples are at WP:HighBeam/Citations.
• HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
• Show off your HighBeam access by placing {{User:Ocaasi/highbeam_userbox}} on your userpage
• When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi ^{t | c} 22:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

A Child of Our Time

Per your request I am advising you that this article has now been nominated at FAC. Perhaps you would (again) pass judgement on the images, and perhaps add any general comment you think necessary. Many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

It was nice of you to notice that this article has been promoted. Brianboulton (talk) 20:32, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Simpsons Guest Stars

Hi, thanks for your comments at the peer review. I think I've addressed them all, apart from more images, which I will add soon. Could you have another look at the reshuffled lead? Also, could you explain what the problem is with the circular redirect? Because I don't see what the issue is. Thanks again. Gran² 00:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

They want the best folks

So on the off-chance you'd be interested and have the time, I put your name forward. It's not official, so you don't have to turn it down or anything like that. See [2] Smallbones (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Yes, I should have filled in some of the details. Time commitment is extensive - 4 hours per week on average has been mentioned. Discussions would mostly be on meta, but maybe also e-mail, Skype. One or maybe two meetings per year in SF or around the world would be needed, with all reasonable expenses covered. There is even a discussion of an honorarium on the order of $2,500 per year to allow those who couldn't otherwise take part to participate. Extensive support from WMF staff, plus audits as part of the WMF and Chapter audits. All this is informed guesswork at this point, as the formation of the FDC is still being discussed, mostly by the FDC Advisory Group (of which I'm a member) on meta. Feel free to take part in the discussion. The only thing you really need to do is consider the possibility, and if asked later - when details are available - give an informed answer. Hope this helps. Smallbones (talk) 15:54, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Philip Humber/archive1

Hello. I hope all is well. Wikipedia:Peer review/Philip Humber/archive1 closed without a review. Can you reopen it?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)

I think this one can be closed now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:24, 18 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thanks, I just don't have the time. The interest has really waned, too. I've covered what I wanted to cover, I guess. Gerry D (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

Afroyim v. Rusk peer review

Hi. Thanks very much for doing a peer review on Afroyim v. Rusk. A few comments:

• My understanding was/is that cites are expected in the lead only when a statement is likely to be disputed, or when direct quotes are involved. I added cites to the opening sentence because, a while back, someone insisted on making the article say that Afroyim protected citizenship only for people born or naturalized in the US — whereas, in fact, the Afroyim opinion included no such limitation, and it was only later (in Rogers v. Bellei) that the coverage of Afroyim was narrowed in this way. I felt (and still feel) that including the cites is appropriate in order to forestall such disputes. As for the cite in the opening sentence of the second paragraph, I added this because some might argue a wider acceptance of multiple citizenship didn't really take hold until Vance v. Terrazas, or maybe not even until the 1990 State Department policy changes — whereas there are in fact sources attributing the start of this policy shift to Afroyim. At least, this is the way I saw/see the matter; I'm definitely open to other views.

• United States v. Wong Kim Ark does, in fact, have some citations in the lead section (though not in the first paragraph) — albeit attached to direct quotes, which must have cites no matter where they are in an article.

• I had been under the (mis?)impression that redlinks were discouraged in FA's — though I tried to find such a guideline or policy just now and couldn't, so I guess maybe I was in error. Mandoli v. Acheson does have its own page now, BTW.

• Michele Bachmann's brief foray into the world of dual citizenship (she said a few days later, BTW, that she would be renouncing her Swiss citizenship, presumably after so many of her fans got their tea bags in a twist over the "divided loyalty" thing) should surely be mentioned in Citizenship in the United States, but I'm hesitant to add this or much more detail about specific individual dual citizens to the Afroyim article, especially cases which happened decades later. Do you really think something about Bachmann belongs here? And if so, where would you want to see it added?

• I'm pretty confident nothing in this article constitutes plagiarism / copyvio, but I agree with you that we need to be careful, so I'll be sure to check it again to be even more sure.

BTW, I've been in contact with Beys Afroyim's son, and I've got a bunch more source material which I'm going to sift through to see if anything more can be added to the article before I'm done with it and ready to nominate it for FA. I'll definitely let you know when this article comes up for FAC. I do wonder if, when that happens, I'm going to end up with as spirited a fight as I did at the Wong Kim Ark FAC's. :-) Thanks again for your feedback here. — Richwales 05:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)

Precious

	featured kindness
	Thank you for combining the participation in featured content, such as Ernest Shackleton and Fanny Imlay, with your approach "never omit... an opportunity of doing a kindness, or speaking a true word, or making a friend", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC)

Horseshoe Curve

Finished with your comments. Thanks again! Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 01:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

A messy image

If you can spare a moment, I have just uploaded File:CosimaWagnerCaricature.jpg. Disappointingly, the picture is blighted by a moiré pattern that wasn't evident on the image that I scanned. I don't mind the background shading, but the way it imposes on the dress is a problem. Is it possible to clean this up? I'm nott happy using the image as it stands. Brianboulton (talk) 23:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your peer review of Part of Me (Katy Perry song) I really appreciate it because I've been waiting forever for one, I'm still doing your suggestions on improving the article and so far, I feel its come a long way. I've requested a copy-edit a while ago also because i eventually want to go for and FA but the peer-review has really helped in the process thanks so much, teman13 ^{TALKCONTRIBUTIONS}

Fairy Tail peer reviews

Hi, Ruhrfisch. There are two peer reviews for List of Fairy Tail characters going on here and here. I thought I would like to make you aware of this matter per Goodraise's suggestion on my talk page. With that said, is it possible if we can merge these two peer reviews into one? Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:36, 8 June 2012 (UTC)

‎Possible Queue 6 late substitution or addition

You an administrator who is listed at WP:DYK as willing to help, so I wanted to call your attention to a particularly timely hook for the next queue Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Possible_Queue_6_late_substitution_or_addition. You may want to make a late addition or substitution since the Tony Awards are tonight.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)

Peer review of Cultural impact of extraterrestrial contact

I implemented most of the recommendations of your peer review, and renamed the article accordingly to Implications of extraterrestrial contact. However, I did not add a popular culture section as this article is about the scientific study of the subject. I await your response. Wer900 • ^{talk • coordinationconsensus defined} 21:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)

Vollendet das ewige Werk!

...well, not quite, but it's coming on. I don't think there are any issues with image licencing this time, but I'd welcome any suggestions you might have as to how these might be improved or perked up, if you have a moment. I haven't sent the article to peer review yet, as I'm still busy around the edges. Brianboulton (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)

Grey's Anatomy

Hi Ruhrfisch! About a week ago, you said you would peer review Grey's Anatomy. I'm just writing to confirm that you still plan on getting to it. Sorry if I sound impatient—it's just that I've been awaiting a peer review for a while, and have been looking forward to it. TRLIJC19 (talk) 01:40, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

On the peer review, you mentioned that the article needs a copy edit. However, it has already been copy edited by a member of the GOCE, just last week. Are you saying that it needs another one? TRLIJC19 (talk) 04:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

I have a few more questions—if you don't mind:

• Again, should this article still be c/e even though it was done last week by the GOCE?
• Is it okay to mention season nine's renewal, just in the lead? I do not know an appropriate section to add it to, and it will only be there until the ninth season commences airing.
• You said: "Throughout its first six years, Grey's Anatomy was included in various critics' top ten lists... is followed by four years of such lists (not six)". However, the years that the show was included in a list were 2005, 2006, 2007, and 2010. That is four years, but it is spanned across six years. Therefore, I thought the best wording would be "throughout its first six years", no?

Hope to hear back from you! TRLIJC19 (talk) 06:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)

Nansen's Fram expedition

TFA tomorrow (23 June). I had better check out the prose; it's a while since I looked at this. Brianboulton (talk) 14:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)

FAC review?

Hi. Do you have time to do an FAC review? It is a fascinating topic, and will be worth your time: Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders. The FAC is here. This is an unusual situation: there are four Supports and one Oppose by a new-ish editor. I'd appreciate an independent assessment. I'm prepared to make any and all improvements necessary. Cheers. --Noleander (talk) 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

You asked...

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William the Conqueror/archive1 Ealdgyth - Talk 23:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)

Big Two-Hearted River

Hi Ruhrfisch, I thought you might be interested in taking a look at Hemingway's Big Two-Hearted River - fishing and rivers! - that I've nominated at FAC. In the least I'd very much appreciate an image review as you're familiar with images from the JFK Library. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for the bother. You can ignore this. I decided not to go through with the FAC. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 10:40, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

PR closure

I am trying to recall the exact closure details. After 30 days, does the bot close discussions on the second day of inactivity or after the second day (on the third day)?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

PR backlog

I have just updated the backlog for 22 June. Would you mind updating it for the next few days, as I am currently a little indisposed and only online intermittently. Hope to be back in proper harness soon. Brianboulton (talk) 23:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)

Boeing 757 now at FAC

Dear Ruhrfisch, as someone who twice reviewed the Boeing 767 article, you might be interested in commenting on the FAC of the sibling article Boeing 757, which shares references and structure. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 00:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)

FAC

Hello. There is an FAC for Ra.One which can be accessed here. I'd be really happy if you could carry out an assessment and give your feeling about the readiness for FA (i.e. Support/Oppose/Leaning either of those two). Thanks and cheers :). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)

PRR

I was wondering if you could peer review Awake (TV series) at Wikipedia:Peer review/Awake (TV series)/archive3, as I'd like to see it at FA soon. Thank you so much! Cheers! TBrandley 19:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)

Cosima

I have nominated Cosima Wagner at FAC, and any comments you care to make will be most welcome there. Brianboulton (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)

Copyediting

Hi again, Ruhrfisch. I have been desperately trying to look for a copyeditor for Grey's Anatomy that has had a FA, but most I find are unavailable. Do you have any recommendations of a great copyeditor? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Arsène Wenger

Given that you reviewed the article the first time a few months back, I was wondering if you could have another look at it (Wikipedia:Peer review/Arsène Wenger/archive2) as I feel it is quite close to FAC. If not, apologies for wasting your time. Lemonade51 (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)

Credo Reference Update & Survey (your opinion requested)

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at [email protected]. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Peer Review?

Hi Ruhrfisch, I've seen that you're pretty active at peer review, but I don't think we've ever crossed paths before. I currently have Marshall Applewhite up for peer review. I'm looking for an experienced reviewer, and I'd love it if you could take a look. I hope to take it to FAC later this month. It's a bit long, but any comments are welcome. Feel free to take your time. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Ganoga Lake

This is a note to let the main editors of Ganoga Lake know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 18, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 18, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Ganoga Lake is a natural lake in Colley Township in southeast Sullivan County in Pennsylvania, United States. For most of the 19th century, the lake was purchased by the Ricketts family in the early 1850s and became part of R. Bruce Ricketts' extensive holdings in the area after the American Civil War. The Ricketts built a stone house on the lake shore by 1852 or 1855; this served as a hunting lodge and tavern. In 1873 a large wooden addition was built north of the stone house, which became a hotel known as the North Mountain House. The hotel had one of the first summer schools in the United States in 1876 and 1877. After the death of R. Bruce Ricketts in 1918, his heirs sold much of his 80,000 acres (32,000 ha) to the state for Pennsylvania State Game Lands and Ricketts Glen State Park. When the lake was sold in 1957, the state tried to purchase it but was outbid by a group of investors who turned the land around it into a private housing development. Ganoga Lake is on the Allegheny Plateau, just north of the Allegheny Front, in sedimentary rocks from the Pocono Formation. The Wisconsin Glaciation some 20,000 years ago changed the drainage patterns of the lake, this diverted its waters to Kitchen Creek and carved the 24 named waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park in the process. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

Congrats on the main page appearance. Finetooth (talk) 03:12, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

That beautiful lake, precious again! You are an awesome Wikipedian (15 August 2009 and 6 June 2012)! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:48, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Congrats Ruhrfisch. Nice to see on a hot day like this! Well nice to see anytime, but a dip in a lake would be welcome right now. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:54, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Ditto on the Congrats! You might be interested in the following QR codes at Congressional Cemetery, Channel 7 ABC WJLA in Washington, July 17, 2012. If you know of a place that could use a few QR codes, I'm one of the folks to contact. Smallbones (talk) 20:20, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

I played around a bit with the panorama. My first reaction to it was "the fog must be hiding something" and I searched around using the scroll-bar until I understood that the fog was the point of the photo: in a setting like this fog can be beautiful. So I reduced the size of the pic by 25%, which makes the scroll bar disappear on my browser, which might let folks know "look at the fog, don't try to look through it." (That's the theory anyway!) If it doesn't work that way for you, please revert my change.

BTW, the photos on the article are great. The sunset may be the best photo in all of Wikipedia. I also especially liked the kayak pic. I know that these 2 are from flickr, but whoever downloaded them has great taste in photos.

As far as QR codes in state parks - they could be used to link to the article on the park, to historical buildings, plant or animal species, geographical features, maybe even to silly things like parking lots or outhouses. Well, maybe the last 2 are too silly, but please let them know that they are not tied down to grave matters.

All the best, Smallbones (talk) 13:08, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

Ben MacDui is obviously a wise, well-balanced person. Your panorama works well in the article. Did you notice that this year's photo of the year was also a lake in the fog? I'm still working on my "cloudy day" technique however, and sub-optimal weather is something that gets me more often than I get it!

Park rangers should certainly know about all the articles we have on lakes, creeks (who writes about creeks these days?), mountains, tree species, bird species, WPA buildings (and outhouses), but I promise I won't bug you on this more than once a month. :-) Smallbones (talk) 19:54, 19 July 2012 (UTC)

I really like the foggy lake panorama, and your discussion of it reminded me of the Microsoft Research Image Composite Editor, which you had mentioned to me some time ago. I finally downloaded and installed it yesterday. Finetooth (talk) 17:14, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Funny...I saw this and did the exact same thing. I like the program a bit better than Autostitch, and the fog came out great. Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 22:24, 20 July 2012 (UTC)

Thanks everyone. The lake is long and narrow and I like how the fog helps show that depth / length. I like how ICE: 1) doesn't have the size limits Autostitch does; 2) has the autocrop feature; and 3) can stitch things Autostitch can't. I do like how Autostitch blends images of differnt exposures together better than ICE. Latley when I make a panorama I try both. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)

500th DYK medal thanks

I'm glad I waited for this, since you have gotten another excellent FA onto the Main Page (And it is, I think, the first lake we've had on the Main Page in ... longer than I can remember. Good job!). Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)

Deep vein thrombosis

Hello again. You told me to let you know if I had worked on DVT and was ready for another peer review. If you get a chance your comments would be appreciated. I put the article up a peer review. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 01:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)

Right now I have enough comments to work on so ignore my request for now, please. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 22:20, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

Issue at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National Register of Historic Places#use of upload-assisting pic in NRHP lists

Could you comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National_Register of Historic Places#use of upload-assisting pic in NRHP lists?

This is regarding a key part of the upcoming WLM-US photo contest. Smallbones (talk) 12:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the image. I'm very serious about the letters being only very slightly fuzzy, they are certainly better than "acceptable". Maybe somebody knows a method to make them very sharp, or an eye-doctor to recommend to me! Smallbones (talk) 15:09, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for tweaking the image. It looks perfect now. Now if I can figure out a way to get it into the template... Actually I'm sure Multichill can do that easily, I'm not a template person though. No problem about the QR codes. Actually it looks like we might get swamped with requests. Monmouth (done) Gibralter (in progress) Moscow (using a government variant) San Francisco (possible soon). And your idea about covered bridges is perfect. Usually the worry is that just posting the codes would look like vandalism or graffiti - I don't think that that applies to covered bridges. Maybe a PA-wide trip is in my future! Smallbones (talk) 18:49, 7 August 2012 (UTC)

Images and some PR matters

I'm not sure how active you are at the moment, but maybe I could ask for your help on a couple of issues:-

• Quick image check on Reginald Heber, my current FAC. I'm sure there are no problems here, but it needs to be independently verified
• On PR, a number of backlog items have been closed by the bot for lack of comments after 14 days. Should I reopen these, or should I leave it to the nominators? My private view is not to go out of my way to assist nominators who never help out with the backlog themselves, but perhaps I am just being mean. Brianboulton (talk) 16:48, 8 August 2012 (UTC)

Please see

Please see the discussion at Template talk:NRHP row#Edit war

Smallbones (talk) 22:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Georgi Kinkladze

A little over a year ago, you reviewed this article when it was at PR, and asked me to let you know when it was at FAC. In a quite appalling display of procrastination, distraction and general inactivity, only now have I submitted it there. But anyway, its up. Given the length of time since you went through the article, I completely understand if you no longer have the time/inclination/interest, but if you do, then any comments would be appreciated. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:44, 15 August 2012 (UTC)

Love to get your reaction

Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#WLM_Android_App_from_WMF

I'll send an e-mail tomorrow about something different.

Smallbones_(smalltalk) 03:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for peer review of Ayurveda

Hey.... Thanks for peer review of Ayurveda article. This is very important article and your peer review is really helpful and I have made certain changes as per your review. Thanks. Abhijeet Safai (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)