User talk:Truco/Archive 20

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 15 ← Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21 Archive 22 → Archive 24

Ric Flair

If we see Flair come back leading up to Wrestlemania, or if he is actually scheduled to wrestle Jericho, then he goes back on the list.

Vjmlhds 22:08, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry

Sorry for bringing that up in the wrong place. I just assumed that it originated from someone there and thought maybe others from there could help me out. Wwehurricane1 (talk) 02:34, 12 February 2009 (UTC) No problem. Sorry, again. Wwehurricane1 (talk) 02:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)

Newsletter

I started a discussion for you and Will here so the two of you would stop reverting on the newsletter. Argue it out, and stop having a really stupid slow-paced edit war on the newsletter of all things. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 01:39, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Damn stupid thing to have an argument over. Honestly. Anyway, *takes deep calming breaths* see ya around. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 01:47, 13 February 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, just felt it should be different. I should have began a discussion.--WillC 01:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

WP:GAMECRUFT

I would just like to point out that WP:GAMECRUFT is not a policy, as you had claimed in the edit summary of WWE Smackdown vs Raw 2009. It is actually a guideline, which means that we are free to ignore it where appropriate. Also, please read WP:IAR for a justification for ignoring the guideline. In cases where breaking from a guideline (or even a policy, on very special occasions) would be beneficial to the wiki, then the policy or guideline in question should be ignored in that case for the benefit of the project. I will not revert and re-add the list myself, because I don't want to get stuck in an edit war, but I just thought that I would stop by and point that out to you. Firestorm (talk) 02:05, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: You think this is an exception to the 10 limit rule?

SRE.K.A.L.24 has replied in more detail on my talk page, but basically, I don't think that a description section is enought to exempt the list. The actual prose (the lead) is not enough for that. Dabomb87 (talk) 04:49, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not really a big fan of these WWE draft pages, I thinki they give too much weight to minor events. I would prefer to see them all merged together because it seems a tad like content forking to me. As for whether or not it's an exception, it's not really up to me, but I do think it's a bit short. However, you can still try a FLC and see what reviewers think. -- Scorpion0422 14:02, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

No, because the WWE draft is basically just a storyline, whereas the NFL draft is a real event (and also the lists are considerably larger and more complex). -- Scorpion0422 21:51, 13 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:

Well, congrats to you too. The only reason I didn't help is because I didn't know what to do. I didn't want to mess up whatever format there was, so I left it to you, it sounds selfish, yes, but at the same time, I didn't want to disrupt anything. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:36, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

If it makes you happy, I haven't given myself any credit whatsoever. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:48, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Still, I just made the table, but you did most of the work. Doesn't seem fair. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:52, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Jeez, we have a nice chat, all of sudden it turns threatening... already. ;) Does being hit with a balloon really hurt? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:57, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
You're so lame. :P If that's the case, you might want to watch out and not get hit by a "truc" [ohhhh]. Now what? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:01, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Whatever; at least it got your attention. Insert: Evil laugh --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:07, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
That was your plan all along? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:19, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Very sneaky. So, what have you been up to? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:54, 14 February 2009 (UTC)
Just working on other stuff. I think I'm done with PPV's, too much of a hassle. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm just waiting for the reviews of both Taboo Tuesday and Vengeance, whatever their outcomes are, I'm retiring from PPV's and sticking to bios. (wrestling and actors). Its too much with writing the matches and adding how the feuds became. That's cool. You review FL's and I'll stick to reviewing GAs. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:41, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

One Night Stand, that's cool. I haven't seen that PPV, but I heard it was great and stuff. If you need help, in which I doubt from me, just ask, although I highly doubt you'll do, I'll be there to help. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Well, I thought I would "offer" my help. ;) Nice, that would give you excellent timing and stuff. Who knows, during that time, you'll probably get Survivor Series '07 to FA, as well. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:01, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
We'll see. How come you withdrew from the cup? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:06, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I respect that and somehow it fits coming from you. I don't mean it like an insulting way. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 01:43, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
IDK, cause User:Sephiroth BCR, said he would try to help me out, but I haven't talked to him since last month, so IDK. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:43, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Are you serious? Man, that sucks. So much for me getting help with the Rfa department. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 15:58, 16 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I guess. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 16:04, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

iDon as of 15 February 2009

Hey Truco, just dropping by to remind you about the iDon article and how I've improved it over the last few days. I know you warned me about using blogs as sources, and I guess SummerPhD already caught that lol. But I've managed to keep almost all of the information I've typed a few days ago, using sources from more reliable sources (like Billboard, EFE, Yahoo!, etc.). My goal is to be able to get this article to some day become a "Good Article" but so far not a lot of information has been released regarding this album. El cangri386 Sign! or Talk 05:48, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 12:15, 15 February 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Opinion on a source at FLC requested

You've already supported, but I would appreciate your feedback on everyHit at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK)‎. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 16:16, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

WWE SmackDown vs. Raw 2009

I have requested full-protection, as User:Chelo61 is not listening at all. Also, watch TNA iMPACT! (video game) as I also removed rosters from there. SimonKSK 19:39, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

AIV, ANI, or 3RR? SimonKSK 19:52, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

RE: Newsletter

It doesn't confirm his signing with the company. If "Extreme Rules" as the name of a ppv is OR and speculation even though it appears on wwe.com, then Richards making one appearance does not qualify as eveidence that he has signed with the company. People have appeared in TNA without contracts before, Daizee Haze for example. Hence why I removed it. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 20:31, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

My apologies. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 20:36, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
I did proofread it Truco. Please don't insult my intelligence by suggesting that I wouldn't before leaving the message for Misza. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 20:50, 15 February 2009 (UTC)
Will, I felt insulted, but whatever. I'm finished with this conversation. Have a nice day. ♥Nici♥Vampire♥Heart♥ 08:40, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

List of awards and nominations received by Adele

Thank you for your comments on my attempt to obtain FL status. Anything else I need to do? By the way, I apologize for the third FLC attempt during a busy time. Rufus Wainwright discography and List of awards and nominations received by Amy Winehouse have been in limbo with the FL process for a while, so I was just trying to concentrate on another list I put together. I have more waiting, so hopefully those two nominations can be taken care of soon. Thanks again! -Whataworld06 (talk) 23:59, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't threaten me.

First thing.

Second thing, I would really like to try to understand the reasoning behind your repeated refusal to let my edit stand in the WCW Tag Team Championship article.

The match in question where Sting won control of the tag team championship from the Giant resulted in the exact same situation that would have arisen from a tournament final match. The match served the same purpose- to fill a "vacancy" (I put it in quotes because even though it's officially considered a vacancy it really isn't). I fail to understand why that can't be included if the tournament finals are.

Don't cite consensus with me here, because the consensus is wrong. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 02:12, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Sources for Sting vs. Giant for WCW Tag Team championship

Upon searching I found several different web pages that back my point up, including one that goes into unnecessarily further detail to explain how the match even got cooked up in the first place. In my opinion that validates the match and the reasons why it took place to the same degree as a tournament final would be, and therefore makes the match notable enough to be included in the list. Otherwise there's no reason to note Sting and Nash's reign as champions. --ChrisP2K5 (talk) 03:23, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

AN3

I would like to inform you that a discussion has begun at an Administrator's Noticeboard concerning the edit warring in which you appear to be involved, on the WWE Smackdown vs. Raw 2009 page. Firestorm (talk) 16:07, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Request

Can you review Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of wind farm projects in Romania please? It is twelve days old and has only one review. I don't want to support without other outside opinions. Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:24, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi filmography

I addressed the problems you have brought up. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 00:56, 18 February 2009 (UTC))

I've addressed the issues you have brought up, and the list should be ready for featured status. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 00:48, 21 February 2009 (UTC))

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Bleach chapters

This FLC does not seem to be getting attention. Could you add your comment if you are free? Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 02:33, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Rufus Wainwright discography

Well, unfortunately, the discography was denied FL promotion. I have no problem with Drewcifer's opposition, but I am still not sure about the best solution to the sources issue that was raised. I have asked him specifically what I can do to earn his support when I re-submit the list for FL status, and I hope you will provide me with your support once again. If needed, I can let you know when I re-submit the list. Thanks again for all the assistance and suggestions you have provided in the past! -Another Believer (talk) 02:54, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the canvass warning. My intentions were good, and I am still learning the ways of wikipedia. Best wishes! -Another Believer (talk) 03:07, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

RfA thanks

List of awards and nominations received by Scissor Sisters

Thank you for your comments and suggestions (re: FL nomination). Please let me know if there is anything else I can do. -Another Believer (talk) 22:07, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. --Another Believer (talk) 00:55, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Did you mean to remove the "A" from "A Touch of Class" (the second time it is mentioned) in the lead? I think we may have been editing at the same time. Just making sure. I didn't want to undo your edit if there was a reason to leave the A off. --Another Believer (talk) 01:02, 20 February 2009 (UTC)
Nooooo problem! I will re-add the A. Just making sure. Thanks again for all of your help! :) --Another Believer (talk) 01:07, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

February 2009

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. I've noticed that you have been adding your signature to some of your article contributions, such as the edit you made to WWE SmackDown! Shut Your Mouth‎. This is a simple mistake to make and is easy to correct. For future reference, the need to associate edits with users is taken care of by an article's edit history. Therefore, you should use your signature only when contributing to talk pages, the Village Pump, or other such discussion pages. For a better understanding of what distinguishes articles from these type of pages, please see What is an article?. Again, thank you for contributing, and enjoy your Wikipedia experience! Thank you. Yes you are! ;) jk, jk. SimonKSK 23:17, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Newsletter crap

Okay, I don't know why you've been acting like an ass to me, if I upset you by mistake then I'm sorry. Anyway, I don't think WWE's highest rating in a year is really that important. WWE have pulled out a 4.0 here and there. But we don't mention that. Also why is it you keep taking shots at TNA. It makes no sense. I respected you, but since you started that I've begun to loathe you like the rest of the pretentious WWE marks around the world. If we are going to mention that then lets just mention TNA getting their third highest attendance record. I'm not pushing something that is kind of small like that, why are we mentioning something as irrelevant as a high rating.--WillC 01:30, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't bother me that much, it just comes at wrong moments. Like after I do something with a wwe thing, you bring out a shot. I'm a TNA fan, but not a fanboy so it isn't really that hurtful, just really unexpected and it makes me imagine you laughing and just seeming like a complete ass. Maybe it was wrong of me to remove the news, I just don't see why it is that notable. But I see your point.--WillC 02:08, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm not taking it that personnel, you can do it again if you want. Just pick the right moments. Just pick you moments beter and I will not care. But during a debate it just doesn't help.--WillC 02:17, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

It doesn't matter to me. Do what you want, I just want to get this cleared up.--WillC 02:31, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

USNA list

I addressed your issues here. Pls look over again. Very good feedback. Thanks. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:27, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

tag title

Can I get your opinion of this so far: User:Wrestlinglover/List of TNA World Tag Team Champions--WillC 21:40, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Actually the match history is important. Joe pinned Devon to win the tag titles for himself. See at VR 07 they pitted Joe and Angle against Team 3D. Joe was X Champion, Angle was World Champion, and Team 3D were the tag team champions. Whoever was pinned lost their title(s). Since Joe pinned Devon, Team 3D lost the title to Joe, who decided to hold it by himself. Then at Hard Justice 07, Joe placed up the X title and both tag titles on the line against Angle who placed up the IWGP Third Belt title and the World Title. Winner got all the belts. Other that that I haven't mentioned anyother match types. Besides Sting winning a four way to become Angle's partner. I followed the ECW Tag Title while I wrote that out last night.--WillC 21:57, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

None are.--WillC 22:05, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Yeah, okay.--WillC 22:26, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

Gail Kim

I have checked that link, there is nothing that says Kim is returning. The only mention of Kim is the video of her training, and that doesn't say anything about her returning. The current wording says all confirmed info; that it was reported she had re-signed, another change since "re-signed" and "resigned" are 2 different things, and that a video of her training was aired on WWE.com. What is wrong with this? It's better than putting in the unsourced claim that it was confirmed by WWE that she is returning. Obviously you and I both know she is coming back, but the current source in the article does not say that. TJ Spyke 22:25, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

I saw the problem. The front page of wwe.com does say that Kim is returning, the video itself (which is what I was checking) did not say that. I have partially reverted, the previous wording implied that the video itself confirmed her return (when the video doesn't, just the link to the video does). TJ Spyke 22:39, 21 February 2009 (UTC)
I agree with you, I was only trying to keep it as accurate as possible since we can't assume anything. TJ Spyke 22:58, 21 February 2009 (UTC)

CNO list

See response there. — Rlevse • Talk • 01:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. Curious, why do they call it full stop instead of what it is, a period? — Rlevse • Talk • 02:21, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Gadget has shrunk the Class Year column, Can you support now? — Rlevse • Talk • 03:31, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Which one did I overlook? — Rlevse • Talk • 17:39, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
I just looked and I don't see any periods at all in the USNA CNO notability section, so I'm afraid you'll have to be more specific. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:01, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
Check now, fixed, I hope. — Rlevse • Talk • 18:15, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Chicago Marathon FLC

Can you cap your comments (or strike them) so I can see what remains.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 17:45, 22 February 2009 (UTC)


Talkback

Hello, Truco. You have new messages at Dabomb87's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Dabomb87 (talk) 19:23, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

I just reviewed one editor, I have archived a couple others. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:33, 22 February 2009 (UTC)
We might discuss this at WT:ER first. I think it would be better to use {{Discussion top}} and {{Discussion bottom}} instead of "poll". I have to go somewhere now, will be back later. Dabomb87 (talk) 19:40, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Arnold Schwarzenegger filmography

Thanks for your support. I've asked the WP:FILMS project and several editors to still take a look at the lead, and hopefully somebody chimes in. I've not been too impressed with peer reviews in the past, but in the future I'll ask some more editors to take a look before nominating, possibly you as well. Thanks again for your assistance in helping me to address the issues with my first FLC. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 20:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: WP:ER

 Done –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone 21:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Saxbe fix

If you think the refs are all in order, can you make a note of that on the FAC discussion. It is essential in order to get a FAC passed that the refs be in order.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:18, 22 February 2009 (UTC)

Mistake? :)

Hey Truco. I guess this was a mistake? :) — Aitias // discussion 00:09, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Same thing, you archived my ER after less than a month and with no reviews. Any particular reason?--Terrillja talk 00:16, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Editor Review

I would like to thank you for your feedback at my WP:ER. I appreciate your taking time out of your day to review my edits and give honest commentary. If you ever want a review yourself, please let me know and i'll reciprocate. Once again, thank you. Firestorm Talk 02:25, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Re

Thank you for the offer, but I'd like to archive it myself. Much appreciated though. I'm still working on the template and will address the FCW box size. Yeah I just noticed the size was a bit off too. --UnquestionableTruth-- 04:49, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

Heath Ledger

Do you think you can use your FL skills in helping me get Heath Ledger's awards and nominations list to FL? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:10, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

To be honest, I am in no rush, I just want to work on it. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:17, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Sure, again, I'm in no rush. Yup, let's do what we've done in the past. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:26, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
IDK, this is my first actor FL. What do you want to work on? --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:50, 23 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I can totally do that. If its cool with you, let me do the sourcing. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 00:01, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, only if its cool with you. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:02, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

WMXXVI

The stadium's operator confirmed the event in the source making any argument over the non-validity of the article baseless. It is a reliable source per WP:V and WP:RS. --UnquestionableTruth-- 03:09, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The statement is in reference to the economic impact the event is expected to have on the region. Therefore it is not speculating or crystal balling. Third opinion? --UnquestionableTruth-- 03:14, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
Seriously, I am open to a third opinion.--UnquestionableTruth-- 03:19, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
"Expected to..." is used in accordance with standard publishing formats. Same reason TBDs and TBAs exist. They are used for the same purpose we here on the Wiki have these WP:OR and WP:Crystal policies. Because, just because it is scheduled to happen, doesn't always mean its going to. Take a course in journalism, its 101. --UnquestionableTruth-- 03:24, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
No no no. Truco I didn't mean that as an insult. I made the note about the journalism course because I am currently taking it. Please don't be offended. It was not my intention. My apologies. --UnquestionableTruth-- 03:28, 24 February 2009 (UTC)
If you found another source, could you put that in instead? The current source does not confirm WM will be in Glendale, so it can't be used. TJ Spyke 03:39, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Michaels vs Kozlov

Yeah Michaels won but check the results Boca91 (talk)

Ralph Bakshi

Exactly what doesn't "look right"? I'm not sure what all of this has to do in relation to how the actual content in relation to the filmography as a featured list. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 06:54, 24 February 2009 (UTC))

  • Done. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 05:40, 25 February 2009 (UTC))
    • Could you clarify what you mean? The columns look fine to me. (Ibaranoff24 (talk) 14:32, 27 February 2009 (UTC))

FAC commentary

Thanks for the work you've been doing at FAC ! I just wanted to mention that citation templates are not required (in fact, many editors hate and avoid them intentionally because of how they chunk up article size and return inconsistent results), so it would be good if you could refrain from adding comments to FAC re "Does not use citation template". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:58, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

The resulting citations need to be consistently formattted, regardless of method used; I'm not sure a script can determine that. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:21, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

RE:ER

Nah, that alright; one Editor Review is enough, especially as I've waited so long :) Happy Editing! Cheers. Imperat§ r(Talk) 22:52, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: editor review

Hello, Truco. You have new messages at Willking1979's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Willking1979 (talk) 22:57, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Editor Review

Thank you for your message. I would like the review to stay up a little longer as it only has one response and I would prefer more feedback, but if that is needlessly difficult to do, I wouldn't be upset if it were archived. -FaerieInGrey (talk) 23:03, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

I would prefer that mine be archived. Cam (Chat) 23:13, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
You can archive mine. Tjanks. --Omarcheeseboro (talk) 23:24, 25 February 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, two weeks would be fine. Thank you! -FaerieInGrey (talk) 23:28, 25 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Editor Review

I would like mine to be kept open a bit longer, if thats ok. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 00:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 00:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

My content

the Content I removed was my own, and no; I did not specify a reason why, becasue I did not realise it was needed. Next time, I will. Altenhofen 01:11, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Many times in the past, I have created something viable on a talk page and it has been deleted, with the deletor not specifying why. Altenhofen 01:31, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Editor review proposal

Do you mind if I move my comment and your reply into a new proposal section? Wronkiew (talk) 01:47, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Re:Editor review

I'm not interested in a review anymore. I opened that nomination when I was still active around here, but really, it's pretty worthless for someone to do it now. You might as well close it down -- thanks. -- Nomader (Talk) 03:18, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

It's just fine. I figured there was something up when there wasn't anything posted for about a month or so after I made the request. Either way it's no biggie. Thanks again for taking care of it. -- Nomader (Talk) 03:25, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Editor Review

Yeah, I'd like it to stay open for longer to get some feedback.

Thanks, Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 09:37, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Preferably until there's a response Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 21:33, 26 February 2009 (UTC)
Ok, fair enough. As long as possible then please Cabe6403 (Talk•Sign!) 07:42, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

re: editor review

Hello, Truco. You have new messages at OlEnglish's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Re: List of filming locations in the Vancouver area

I see you're quite experienced at bringing lists up to Featured status. I was wondering what advice you may have for me on improving this list. Or even if it's worth trying, would you say this list has potential to be a Featured List? Any comments/feedback would be appreciated. -- OlEnglish (Talk) 22:38, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

Wrestlemania 25

How has WWE not speculated at that match? Have you never heard "The winner of the Royal Rumble gets to face the champion of his choosing at Wrestlemania"? I was at Royal Rumble, and trust me, they made it quite clear. (Psst, that's what Randy Orton celebrating in fireworks pointing at the giant Wrestlemania sign means) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Richieice (talk • contribs) 01:09, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

ER

Please leave it on that page as i would like other people's opinions. Simply south is this a buffet? 12:37, 27 February 2009 (UTC)

Question

You may not have an answer to this question, and that is certainly acceptable if that is the case. I just thought I would ask you since you have assisted me in the past and I see how involved you are here. Since you have taken a look at Rufus Does Judy at Carnegie Hall, I was wondering if knew of any rules or preferences regarding duplicating material for the DVD associated with the album, Rufus! Rufus! Rufus! Does Judy! Judy! Judy!: Live from the London Palladium. I would not use the same reception sections (though hopefully I could find some reviews specifically for the DVD), but much of the conception/development, concerts, promotion, gay elements, etc. are similar. Is it redundant to include much of the same information in both articles? I would like to think each article should read independently, but much of the information would be the same. Any thoughts? Also, do you think the album page needs a "see also" section with the DVD link listed? If you do not have an opinion or are busy with other work, no problem! Just thought I would ask. --Another Believer (Talk) 21:13, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Re: Editor Review

Yeah, may aswell, huh? - PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me | Looking for a trustworthy Wiki alternative? | 22:27, 28 February 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, I wasn't very clear. You may archive it, thanks. PoinDexta1 | Talk to Me 03:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Other Much

When you have the time, take a look at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Cincinnati Reds managers. Dabomb87 (talk) 00:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Then why don't we just list every wrestler? IGN released four different videos, yet we're insisting upon only listing wrestlers from one video. --ECWAGuru (talk) 01:00, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I'm not saying there should be a list -- I have been defending the policy and preventing people from creating lists. My point is that it's utterly pointless to only list a small handful of wrestlers from one video (especially when IGN had four separate videos). A summary would say "40 wrestlers will be included." A summary would not only list 1/4 of the wrestlers.--ECWAGuru (talk) 03:37, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject Professional wrestling newsletter

Delivered: 11:55, 1 March 2009 (UTC) by MiszaBot (talk)

Dexter FL

Hi, I've replied to your comments on my Dexter awards FL. Would you be so kind to take another look? Thanks.--Music26/11 15:54, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Truco. You have new messages at Nn123645's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2006 (U.S.)/archive1

Thanks for the prompt review. BTW, I am done addressing your concerns at Wikipedia:Featured list candidates/List of Hot 100 number-one singles of 2002 (U.S.)/archive1. Regards, Efe (talk) 17:30, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the support. --Efe (talk) 20:19, 2 March 2009 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Truco/Archive_20&oldid=1092090372"