Talk:Margherita, Assam

WP:CHICAGO roles

It is not exactly clear to me what the best way to divide the responsibilities for the new coordinators who have volunteered. Here is what I think we need in terms of review coordinators:

1. we need at least one person to be the peer review coordinator for WP:CHICAGO. This person would be responsible for both WP:CHIR#PR, which is for internal peer reviews within the project and WP:CHIR#EPR, which are peer reviews at WP:PR and elsewhere that we should try to transclude to WP:CHIR. I think such a person should comment on all reviews listed at either of these places and coordinate archiving of such reviews. This person should also monitor WT:CHICAGO for articles seeking assistance and make sure the editors are aware that we now have project reviews. In the early stages of the project this person should also comment on all discussions at WP:CHIR#A-CLASS until we build up some momentum.
2. we need at least one person to be the A-Class review coordinator for WP:CHICAGO. This person would be responsible for WP:CHIR#A-CLASS. This person should comment on all reviews there and coordinate archiving of such reviews. This person should also monitor WP:CHIR#FAC and WP:FAC because articles listed for FAC review should often come from our A-Class pool in the future. Also articles that fail may come to our A-Class for guidance. In the early stages of the project this person should comment on all discussions at either WP:CHIR#PR or WP:CHIR#EPR in order to help get the momentum going for our review process.
3. we need someone to monitor delistings at WP:FAR, WP:FARC, WP:FLRC, WP:GAR, and keep an eye on individual GAR discussions. This person should keep an eye on whether all the leading editors of each article, the leading editors of each article's talk page, and the projects listed on the talk pages have been duly notified. This will help maximize the likelihood that we find people to respond to discussion comments. Transcluding all articles to the proper locations at WP:CHIR is a must. This person hopefully will have an interest in helping to clean up an occasional article or two as well.

Generally, discussion pages are removed immediately at WP:CHIR, but kept at WP:CHIDISCUSS for two weeks after closing. I have been attempting to do all of these things for the project myself as well as my other tasks. We have three volunteers who mentioned an interest in reviews so each of you should discuss among yourselves which coordinator you would like to be.

Two of the review coordinator respondents also listed Assessments. Within the assessment department at WP:CHIASSESS we need a few tasks handled as well.

1. Assessment requests need to be responded to.
2. WP:CHIQUALITY and WP:CHIPRIORITY need to be kept up to date
3. Category:Unknown-importance Chicago articles and Category:Unassessed Chicago articles need to be kept up
4. Category:Top-importance Chicago articles needs to be administered. We have made it policy to keep the Top-importance for the top .2% of all WP:CHICAGO articles. Thus the following will be the next promotions based on the last round of voting:

Magnificent Mile -when the project gets to 16000 articles

Haymarket Riot -16500 articles

Daniel Burnham -17000 articles

Chicago River -17500 articles

Lake Shore Drive -18000 articles

Museum of Science and Industry (Chicago) -18500 articles

Chicago Tribune -19000 articles

The following will be considered for promotion or we may call for another vote or we may discontinue promoting altogether: Soldier Field -19500 articles

Sears, Roebuck and Company -20000 articles

Chicago school (architecture) -20500 articles

William Wrigley Jr.-21000articles

New candidates for Top-importance should be continually brought forth. Alternative selection methods may be considered, but currently we support or oppose inclusion on a ballot and then vote on the ballot. We should keep discussion open on this issue. Again, please discuss the division of responsibility. I am hoping to have all responsibilities assigned and be a fairly fully functional project on September 1.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:55, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I am not sure if I was mistaken in my interpretation of your interest. Were you not interested in being a coordinator and instead being more of a helper?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:13, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Above I described the three types of review coordinators. I also mentioned various roles in assessments. The thing that is most important is that the three people listed at Wikipedia:CHICAGO/leadership as review coordinators determine which role that they would like to have. I had asked that you work it out among yourselves, but if you reply to me first you can have any one of the three coordinator roles above. In short the three types of reviewers are peer-review, A-Class review, and delisting review.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Yes you are listed, but you should choose one of the above three types as your primary role.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

I try to keep everything transcluded at WP:CHIR while it is active and keep everything at WP:CHIDISCUSS (which transcludes to the main project page) while it is active plus two weeks afterwards. Right now we have a borderline WP:FLRC, and a losing WP:FAR in process. I think both of the current community WP:GARs are pretty safe. I think we are going to lose an GA for Ernest Hemmingway on an individual WP:GAR. These are all the things that I know of right now. Basically, your role would be to try to find people to help out by making sure all the leading editors of the article and its talk page have been contacted. Also, make sure all the projects on the articles' talk pages have been contacted. When simple things can be done you may want to step in. E.g. the current FLRC was not really so close to the border until I made some of the final changes although a lot of work has been done since it was nominated. It would be your own decision how much effort you are willing to put into saving articles from delisting, but finding people and helping out a bit is good. You will want to patrol the FAR, GAR, FLRC for new listings. I have never noticed one of ours at WP:FPR (we only have two featured portals) or in the delisting section at WP:FPC, but someday something will eventually appear at one of these pages. In fact, we have previously had a featured picture delisted. I don't know enough about picture editing to know if you could even do anything about avoiding a delisting other than by participating in the discussion. Thanks for assuming some responsibility.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 00:00, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

If you want to help out with the delisting area, Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Chicago Bears seasons is starting to look like it is headed for a delist. I think it is salvagable, but if you are interested in such matters, I leave it to you.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:37, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for taking your coordinator role seriously. Good luck in meeting the current objections.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for keeping me up to date. Let me know when the final decision is made.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:47, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

There are times when you can save an article from delisting with relatively minor work (see what I did at Grand Central Station (Chicago) to save its GA. Blues is beyond me. This was somewhere in between. I had hoped someone would want to do whatever was needed. I did my part to help, but do not intend to drive this one home. We lose some sometimes. This will be our first list, but it was bound to happen.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 22:46, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Deadmalls.com

Don't know if you've been keeping track of this afd since you made it, but it looks like a snowball keep to me. Ten Pound Hammer and his otters • ^{(Broken clamshells • Otter chirps • HELP)} 23:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for August 25 and September 8, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 35	25 August 2008	About the Signpost

WikiWorld: "George P. Burdell"	News and notes: Arbitrator resigns, milestones
Wikipedia in the News	Dispatches: Interview with Mav
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

Volume 4, Issue 36	8 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikimedia UK disbands, but may form again	WikiWorld: "Helicopter parent"
News and notes: Wikipedian dies, milestones	Wikipedia in the News
Dispatches: Featured topics	Dispatches: Style guide and policy changes, August
Features and admins	Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News
The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 20:47, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

Dassault Ouragan

Hello,

Thanks for the offer. I'd like to take a raincheck on that. You see several other folks were working on that article responding to my request. So I decided to move on to another article in the mean time. Currently I am working on [Jagdgeschwader 1|Jagdgeschwader 1 Oesau]. Once that's done, I will come back to this one. I don't think this article has enough material to justify GA review. My modest goal is to get a B at least.

Thanks for the Offer. perseus71 (talk) 14:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Jagdgeschwader 1 (World War 2)

Hi!

This article is Rated B at this time. I would like to see it go to GA or A or FA Rating. Could you please give me comments on weather its ready for that level ? I'd really appreciate any detailed opinions on the areas lacking.

Thanks. perseus71 (talk) 18:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Marcusmax,

Yes i was aware you do not have the power to make it GA or A or FA. All I am looking to find are points that it lacks in order to become one. Those you have already provided.

I did have a hard time in getting Sources. But as of now I have 9 Cited sources that are reliable. Do you think it still needs more ? Also do you think the lead in is sufficient ? Please let me know.

Thanks perseus71 (talk) 19:54, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hi Marcusmax,

I appreciate the offer of listing for a peer Review. I already listed it on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history for peer review. Also whatever sources I have, were cited at least 3-4 times each. I will go look for more sources as suggested by you.

Thanks perseus71 (talk) 20:35, 17 September 2008 (UTC)

Hello Again!

I have about 18 Sources by now. Almost all are books. Pretty much each is cited at least 3-8 times. A large amount of information is added as well. Could you please let me know what you think ? Specifically if its now worthy of nomination for a A ? Thanks perseus71 (talk) 15:16, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Signpost updated for September 15, 2008.

The Wikipedia Signpost Weekly Delivery

Volume 4, Issue 37	15 September 2008	About the Signpost

Wikiquote checkuser found to be sockpuppeteer	WikiWorld: "Ubbi dubbi"
News and notes: Wikis Takes Manhattan, milestones	Dispatches: Interview with Ruhrfisch, master of Peer review
Bugs, Repairs, and Internal Operational News	The Report on Lengthy Litigation

You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 04:54, 21 September 2008 (UTC)

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

1998 PHS TFA

Thanks for asking me first. I have no strong preference, but I'm leaning slightly toward no, since we've been on the main page pretty often as of late. But if you wish to nominate it, you can. Thanks for the compliments, BTW! ♬♩ Hurricanehink (talk) 17:31, 23 September 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Nc-logo.jpg)

Thanks for uploading Image:Nc-logo.jpg. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 06:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Festival airlines.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Festival airlines.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 10:26, 3 October 2008 (UTC)

Barnstar

Thanks for the barnstar. It really means a lot to me. Hopefully one day we'll have a little golden star on Melbourne Airport. Cheers. Mvjs (talk) 04:08, 4 October 2008 (UTC)

Delistings

You may want to watch WP:CHIAA. It is a bot-administered page that keeps track of ongoing workflows for WP:CHICAGO. As delistings coordinator, you may want to watch and comment on the WP:AFDs at issue there.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 14:28, 6 October 2008 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free media (Image:Dane County Airport Logo.gif)

Thanks for uploading Image:Dane County Airport Logo.gif. The media description page currently specifies that it is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, it is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the media was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that media for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

If you have uploaded other unlicensed media, please check whether they're used in any articles or not. You can find a list of 'image' pages you have edited by clicking on the "my contributions" link (it is located at the very top of any Wikipedia page when you are logged in), and then selecting "Image" from the dropdown box. Note that all non-free media not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. BJBot (talk) 04:25, 10 October 2008 (UTC)

Barbers Point Light (Hawaii)

In general, lighthouses have been held to be innately notable. Mangoe (talk) 02:03, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

Marcusmax, in the future, please allow more than 9 minutes before nominating a page for deletion. Many people tend to produce content within the hours following the page creation, and nominating a page for deletion within the first hour can cause many problems. Ottava Rima (talk) 02:06, 11 October 2008 (UTC)

In any case the basic info has been added. Mangoe (talk) 02:29, 11 October 2008 (UTC)