User talk:Damien Linnane/Archive 2

---

Announcements and news for WikiProject Punk music

May 2012: Updates: The project is trying to get a spot in the WikiProject report of The Signpost. For more information check the talk page. The article proposed for Punk music collaboration of the month (as part of WikiWomen's history month) received no substantial edits. If you still wish to get involved more information is available at the talk page The unassessed Punk music articles backlog has been tackled, thanks to pjoef (talk · contribs). Articles Work has been ongoing over the past few months to clean up both halves of the list of punk rock bands Green Day and American Idiot have been nominated for Good Article Status by Yasht101 (talk · contribs) 21st Century Breakdown has been put up for a peer review by TheSpecialUser (talk · contribs) Tom Gabel has been substantially expanded and rewritten by IllaZilla (talk · contribs) Features If you see a picture, article, or list that lives up to the corresponding featured criteria, please nominate it.

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

Cheers,

benzband (talk) & Guerillero | My Talk 06:23, 24 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

You can't put RfCs at the top of a talk page like you did on Talk:Australian Christian Lobby. We have sections so the discussion can be chronological.Curb Chain (talk) 14:27, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I apologise, I misread the instructions. I've moved the RfC to the bottom of the page. Freikorp (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Can you please look at the Talk pages and edits by DGG on Yeshiva College and let me know if that is legit and reasonable. I don't like the censorship going on unless there has been a breach of guidelines.

Can you reply by email to me mikeybear69@gmail.com if possible.

Thanks.

Michael. Mikey Bear (talk) 02:17, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mikey, thanks for contacting me. Unfortunately due to my work commitments until July 22nd I will be unable to access internet for long enough to look at anything right now. Basically I'm a fair bit off the beaten track at the moment and every few days when I get back to the civilised world I only have a few minutes to check emails before I have to get back to work. I know the issue may no longer be active in 2 weeks when I get back to the real world, but I promise to take a look at it then. Sorry I can't be of more help right now. Freikorp (talk) 10:10, 8 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Mikey, sorry for the late reply, my life has been somewhat hectic. I've looked at the edits, and at the editors statement on the talk page. His arguments, particular regarding "any encyclopedic interest in the event as it pertains to the school does not require ... names" are logical, but you could certainly argue against them; he cites "DO NO HARM" but his edits could be considered in violation of the Do no harm#Neutral point of view guideline. I would certainly be interested to see other experienced editors opinions on the matter; I am certain you are not the only one who disagrees with him. I personally think it is not inappropriate to name names prior to conviction if they have been reported by reliable sources. I would certainly vote to include the names after any convictions were made, and will comment on the issue at the talk page if any convictions are made.

If you think another users edits could be violating a guideline don't hesitate to say so and attempt to counter their arguments on the talk page; if it turns out you were wrong you at least learn something new about editing and if an agreement is not reached and you still think they are wrong after discussion consult a dispute resolution process; I have found the Wikipedia:Requests for comment and Wikipedia:Third opinion processes to be very helpful at getting more opinions and resolving disputes. Freikorp (talk) 12:14, 27 July 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Letter from the editor: New Format Article news: Work done and where you can help

Project news: Signpost coverage Special Report: Wikimania

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

Cheers,

benzband (talk) & Guerillero | My Talk 00:35, 5 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute in which you may have been involved. Content disputes can hold up article development, therefore we request your participation in the discussion to help find a resolution. The thread is "Australian Christian Lobby". Thank you! EarwigBot ^{operator / talk} 09:59, 17 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Are you still interested into following this discussion:Wikipedia:Dispute_resolution_noticeboard#Australian_Christian_Lobby_discussion? — ΛΧΣ21™ 03:43, 24 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I respect you. You are willing to participate in meaningful discussions. I believe that you, 'adhere to guidelines'. I do not respect Grotekennis. Grotekennis, ignores Wiki P&Gs, editor comments, editor consensus, Reliable Source Noticeboard consensus and Dispute Resolution Noticeboard consensus and does what he wants to do. He demands 'scientific research' while dismissing and removing 'scientific research' which does not suit him. The summary of the finding of the Dispute resolution noticeboard presented by ΛΧΣ21 and supported by all the editors who participated is, "all of the sources that have been added to the article and do not talk about the ACL should be removed and the content it was supposedly supported, removed too" THE GROTEKENNIS SOURCES currently [30] to [34] PROVIDED FOR THE PARAGRAPH DO NOT TALK ABOUT ACL. The 'volunteer' (who Grotekennis mentioned as justifying his edits) specifically said, "the sources need to mention ACL or its affiliates related to the topic being discussed. Wikipedias guidelines on sources are very clear on this point". THE GROTEKENNIS SOURCES DO NOT MENTION ACL OR ITS AFFILIATES.

Interestingly, last week Australia's Kirby Institute's Surveillance and Evaluation Program for Public Health at the University of New South Wales - released its latest scientific research. Refer HIV cases in Australia is on the rise http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/hiv-cases-in-australia-is-on-the-rise/story-e6frg6n6-1226497432701 An interesting read. The head of the Institute, Associate Professor David Wilson, said the real rise in the number of cases, "was of concern". Jim Wallace's concern is further validated.

Also interestingly the Jensen citation supporting Jim Wallace (also deleted) refers the need for 'compassion and objectivity' http://www.smh.com.au/national/anglican-archbishop-backs-christian-lobbys-gay-views-20120910-25ogi.html Jensen went on to say, "It's very hard to get to the facts here because we don't want to talk about it, and in this country censorship is alive and well".

On another matter - on 13:39, 11 October 2012 (UTC) you said, "The ACL make a lot of outrageously distorted claims . . . ". I completely agree with the point you were making to Grotekennis - obviously he was not interested. However the euthanasia-trivial-reasons-example you used, which included the words, "absolutely absurd", "baseless scare tactic", may have been a bit strong considering Philip_Nitschke has said that, these casualties are tragic. Youth suicide is tragic - (in today's media) http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/victoria/mental-health-experts-on-standby-for-schools-hit-by-suicide-as-part-of-federal-government-campaign/story-e6frf7kx-1226502696526

Grotekennis is determined to get his way and in so doing undermines the credibility of Wikipedia as an encyclopedia. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sam56mas (talk • contribs) 12:32, 25 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. Grotekennis frustrates me also. I noticed what you mentioned regarding his edits and the only reason I haven't done anything about it is because I'm going on vacation tomorrow and I don't want to start any disputes before I go, but I certainly believe all references that do not mention the ACL should be removed, and I will remove these references myself once I get back from vacation if they are still there.

Regarding your other comments: I'm happy to debate things in general if you like here. Providing opposing arguments are based on logic (as opposed to superstition, it really makes me angry when people say they are for/against something ONLY because their holy book says so) I often find it interesting to hear other peoples opinions on things, even if they differ greatly from my own.

There is no doubt that homosexual men are far more likely to have HIV than heterosexual men. Conservative Christians mention this fact often. What I've never heard a conservative Christian mention, however, is the fact that homosexual women are far less likely to have HIV than heterosexual women. In the United States at least, there has never been a confirmed case of a women getting HIV through sex with another women [1] Jim Wallace says "the homosexual lifestyle has some disastrous health outcomes" and cites HIV as an example however HIV rates amongst women would undeniably drop if more women only had sex with women. The ACL often only tell half the story, give undue weight to certain facts and completely ignore information that harms their cause (this is hardly surprising, most lobby groups do this). I also find it incredibly appalling that Jim Wallace brings up the fact that LGBT people are far more likely to be depressed. Of course they are far more likely to be depressed in this country; our government and the ACL treat them like second class citizens! Rates of depression amongst LGBT people are lower in countries where gay marriage is legal. A guy I went to high school with posted this on Facebook after the gay marriage bill was voted down:

To be completely honest, I don't know if I ever want/feel the need to get married, but to have a bunch of elected, "learned" people tell me that I am not worthy of the option because of a certain facet of me that I was born with and have no control over, actually almost overwhelms me to tears. And to read that Senator Cory Bernardi suggests gay marriage will lead to beastiality makes me feel the same pit in my stomach I felt as a teenager who struggled to accept who I am.

I'm not gay or even bisexual, to be perfectly honest I don't understand how men can be attracted to other men. But every moral fibre of my being tells me it is wrong to deprive someone of rights just because of what they have between their legs, and just FYI that's why I campaign for gay marriage.

Regarding the euthanasia comments. Yes I agree my wording was harsher than it needed to be but this was because it was aimed at Grotekennis. I thought if I stressed how much I don't like the ACL he might value my opinion more (I don't think it worked, lol). I firmly stand by the general point I was making though. Legalising euthanasia for people who are already dying or people who have extremely poor quality of life with no chance of improvement (for example, quadriplegics) is not going to lead to to people legally getting assistance with euthanasia for trivial reasons. I understand some depressed people have used Nitschke's methods to kill themselves (despite the disclaimers he provides with this information) however this is, unfortunately, a fact of life. Some depressed people are going to attempt to take their own lives no matter what you do, and some people are always going to use information in a way it was not intended to be used. Example: I still have the chemistry textbook I bought when I was at University. Now if I wanted to I could use the information in that textbook to help me make a bomb or illegal drugs, but just because this information could potentially be abused shouldn't be a valid reason to censor chemistry. Have you read The Peaceful Pill Handbook? I'll post you a copy for free if you like. I'd assume it would be an interesting read even for people against euthanasia, but I can't exactly guarantee that of course. I'd make a comment about why I am for voluntary euthanasia, but instead i'll just advertise this website that you might find interesting: http://www.christiansforve.org.au I'm actually a member of this organisation and have worked with them in the past (openly as an atheist, they accept support from heathens lol).

Well I'm logging out of wiki now and I won't be back for two weeks. See you then. Freikorp (talk) 08:55, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your detailed comments.

Re your: "I will remove these references myself . . . " Thank you. I have added a comment on the ACL talk page and at User_talk:Dominus_Vobisdu#ACL

My personal view on euthanasia is not based on 'superstition' and has not been formed 'ONLY because their holy book says so'. In my case, it is a belief in the dignity, the beauty and the fragility of life and a concern for the unknown flow-on effects for the elderly, (plus Philip_Nitschke comments) which causes me to believe we need to be very careful here. Others (obviously for various reasons) are concerned about euthanasia, for instance: http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au/news/opinion/piers-akerman-lets-put-legalised-euthanasia-issue-down/story-e6frezz0-1226504473514

The matter of HIV and women - with respect - is a red herring and can be explained (for me) by issues as such as male promiscuity and male physiology.

The 'deprive someone of rights just because . . . ' is a simplistic characterisation of a much more complex situation. Detailed responses by others are available elsewhere. To respond to your question with a question > Why are there demands that the distinctions associated with 'LGBTI' must be disaggregated, while the distinctions associated with 'marriage' must be aggregated? To say depression in the LGTBI community (which I don't deny) is (largely?) caused by homophobia, seems to me to be primarily a blame-shifting exercise.

You mention quadriplegia. I have a friend who was very active and inspirational. He owns a successful project-home-building company. Two years ago, he crashed into another bike rider on a bike-track. He is now a quadriplegic - he remains an inspirational person. It can be a mental issue, rather than a physical issue. I know a number of depressed people and others 'on the edge' some with drug issues - some now dead - and of course the frail-elderly. As a society we should offer encouragement and support, rather than offering a chemical way out. A friend was telling me about a man she met a few years ago. Apparently he had no contact with his family. He had no contact with his children or grandchildren. He admitted he was very lonely. He was an active euthanasia advocate.

Your offered of a copy of the Peaceful pill handbook. Thanks, but no thanks. I can see enough here The_Peaceful_Pill_Handbook and http://www.peacefulpillhandbook.com/ plus links. Wikipedia notes: "Nitschke was involved in an argument in the press with the family of a woman suffering from post-natal depression who read the book and took the advice offered about travelling to Mexico. Her drawn-out death caused her family to attack the accuracy of the book's advice". I note: "This eBook is not intended for the mentally ill or depressed. Those with psychiatric conditions should contact their family physicians". Hardly reassuring to me that this sentence would prevent inappropriate use. Many people (as evidenced by determined Wikipedia editors) take little notice of what is written.

I have no problem with not continuing life by artificial means. I have no problem with criticism of ACL, providing it is done within the Wikipeda P&Gs. Sam56mas (talk) 22:38, 1 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd clear a few things up. Firstly if you were offended I apologise - I wasn't trying to belittle you with the 'holy book' sentence, I've just had conversations with Christians before who openly admit they are only against homosexuality because the bible is against it, and they blindly obey the book regardless of how they personally feel about things. It's made me a bit defensive about debating with religious people.

Being for legalised euthanasia certainly does not make me want it as the first choice for anyone. If your friend is still happy to go on living as a quadriplegic that actually makes me happy, I just think people should have the option to die peacefully if they are not physically going to get better. I'm actually for euthanasia for very similar reasons to why you say you are against it, I believe in the beauty and dignity of life. I also believe encouragement and support should be offered first, but there are situations where encouragement and support are not going to help - some time ago I watched a close relative die from cancer slowly over several months. His quality of life was extremely poor; for the last few weeks he couldn't move his arms or his legs at all, and struggled to turn his head to look at us. Encouragement and support are not going to help here, I'm not 100% sure he knew where he was and what was happening in the last few days. By the time he died this person whom I loved had no dignity or beauty left, I was actually relieved when he died because that meant he didn't have to suffer anymore. If I get diagnosed with the same kind of terminal cancer I don't want to be forced to die like that, I'd like society to have some compassion and allow me to die peacefully at my own discretion. I want Australia to have the same euthanasia laws as Oregon.

I'm certain there are factors other than homophobia and lack of rights for LGBTI people that cause depression, I wasn't trying to say all the blame lies with the ACL and people who share their opinions, I was trying to make a specific point. You see I often wonder, but I've never found out, if the ACL and their supporters actually realise how much damage they do to the mental health of gay people. I close friend of mine who is a lesbian was actually reduced to tears after reading comments made at the National Marriage Day (slippery slope to polygamy, comparison to paedophilia, gay marriage should be laughed at etc). The sentiment expressed in the comments my friend posted on Facebook are typical amongst how at least all the gay people I know react to lobbying against LGBT rights.

I understand moral objection to euthanasia and abortion. I do not understand objection to gay marriage. If you don't like gay marriage don't marry a gay person; problem solved. I remember reading an extract from an email the ACL sent out to their followers, in which they complained that they were losing the debate over gay marriage. I couldn't help but think, what on earth do the ACL think they are losing? If gay marriage becomes legal, the 40-something percent of Christians who are against gay marriage won't have lost anything. They still can get married in the manner they wish to, the only difference is now other people have the same rights they've always had. Why should we all be bound by a interpretation of marriage that only a particular group of Christians believe in? I just don't understand the ACL's position on LGBT rights, and neither do just over half of Christians according to recent polls. Freikorp (talk) 07:42, 11 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I have no problem with people expressing, or respectfully promoting the views that they hold. I will get back to you in a few days, after I demonstrate something. Sam56mas (talk) 23:55, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

There are a group of Wiki editors who do not like ACL. Fine. There are a group of Wiki editors who do not like ACL, and who make sure that Wikipedia ACL is skewed towards their views. They are not interested in 'etiquette' or respect for Wikipedia policies or guidelines. (Other than demanding strict adherence by others). In my opinion you are not part of that second group. While you may be able to define what you mean by: Reproductive Rights, Marriage Equality and Right to Die, others (specifically the demand-for-change advocates) will see things differently, particularly in regards to the 'necessary limits' in each case. In each case, the 'rights' of others are involved. With complex, social-policy changes such as these, Australia (I believe) will not be able adequately define, let alone maintain restraints - any more than can 'democratic Wikipedia'. Rules, ethics and respect are of little concern to some people. Sam56mas (talk) 21:31, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for adding the Montanists to Unfulfilled Christian religious predictions - I believe that belongs there. I notice you didn't add the 1st century prediction, and I think that's probably the right decision. Not only is there a dispute over whether Jesus or Paul predicated an apocalyptic event, but also over what event(s) they might have been referring to. StAnselm (talk) 01:52, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Whilst I certainly think the 1st century "prediction" (or rather the way people reacted to it) is notable in itself, I agree it doesn't belong at that page either. Freikorp (talk) 01:59, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Freikorp. You and I were posting on the SNL talk page at the same time. You can see my comments there. Btw, I meant no offense in my edit comment; I simply said "please get consensus". I know you opened a discussion - which I really appreciate - but there was no participation. In any case, I do apologize if I hurt your feelings. Thanks and have a wonderful new year! --76.189.98.149 (talk) 06:10, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Forgot to mention... great job on noticing the cross symbol being used. I totally agree with your thoughts on that. Also, you said "It's been two weeks since I removed the content, and your revert has been the first reaction". Although it's the first reaction, the reason is because the article is relatively inactive - it only gets a few edits a month, which is why I'm not surprised at all that there were no comments on the talk page. --76.189.98.149 (talk) 06:13, 30 December 2012 (UTC) 06:26, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. No worries, I probably over-reacted a little - it's often hard to judge the sentiment people are expressing in the limited space an edit summary provides. Thanks for your comments on the talk page. To be honest I should have waited a bit longer for comments (and I usually do) but I though Christianising the deaths of non-Christians was particularly rude and when I went to change that I thought I may as well make the other proposed change at the same time. Freikorp (talk) 07:42, 30 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Dami Mission at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! BlueMoonset (talk) 23:31, 4 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. I've addressed all the issues that have been mentioned, and am awaiting further comments/suggestions at the articles entry. Freikorp (talk) 00:45, 5 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Special Report: Sign up for the Wikicup Article news: Work done and where you can help

Project news: New templates and "rescued" articles

Delivered by In actu (Guerillero) on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed in Category:WikiProject Punk music members or on our participants list. If you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove the userbox from your profile, remove the category from your profile, and/or move your name down to the Inactive/former members section of the participants list. Thanks.

Cheers,

benzband (talk) & Guerillero | My Talk 22:07, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your work on List of dates predicted for apocalyptic events. I suppose you've checked out the article's traffic statistics? It's down to only a few thousand a day, after peaking at 136,000. StAnselm (talk) 23:13, 8 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Those page statistics made me laugh - I didn't even think to look at them. I'm not surprised they spiked around December 21, but I wasn't expecting it to be by that much. You might think this is really silly, but I'll tell you anyway - I guess I edit wikipedia for the same reason the overwhelming majority of editors would, but my motivation for working on this page was hoping that if the page was well written, had a large number of notable predictions, and was well referenced, people scared of apocalyptic events would read it, see how many false prediction there have been over the millennia, and maybe calm down a notch. I decided to do this after noticing how some people were reacting to Harold Camping's 2011 predictions. I hope a few people took the 2012 prediction a little less serious after reading the article. Freikorp (talk) 00:42, 9 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the note. I'll be vigilant. StAnselm (talk) 01:23, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating the article. I was just about to write you about the red links. Widr (talk) 07:52, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I was considering writing to you about the red links as well. As per Wikipedia:Red links, red links shouldn't necessarily be deleted on sight, as they are helpful for indicating that a page will be created soon or that an article should be created for the topic. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 08:04, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 7 February 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dami Mission, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the founder of the Dami Mission church predicted the world would end on October 28, 1992, but used donations from his followers to purchase bonds that did not mature until after that date? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dami Mission. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Lord Roem ~ (talk) 08:03, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of The Age of Innocence (book) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Gamaliel (talk) 23:49, 21 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 February 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Age of Innocence (Hamilton book), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that in 2010, a man from England was convicted on child pornography charges for purchasing books, including The Age of Innocence, from a mainstream bookshop? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:03, 27 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey man, I'm sorry I didn't correctly cite the edit I made earlier today. I put my rationale in the talk page, but not in the edit description itself. All the pop culture stuff pertaining to Shake and Bake and not Shake 'n Bake I put in the disambiguation page. The Simpsons ref was the only one that actually had anything to do with the Kraft food product, which is why I left it. Would it be alright if I restored the edit? — Muckapedia (talk) 14^e mars 2013 16h23 (−4h)

Hi. Sorry for the late reply. I missed your talk page explanation - now that I've seen it your edit makes sense, and I've restored it myself. Cheers for the message. Freikorp (talk) 11:03, 17 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

"members of the public"

Is a broad sweeping statement without factual evidence

There is no subsequent balance or context

"A group of Australian Christians"

There are millions, which group?

How is a segment of 250 people form a public narrative?

All questions I would like answered in the sake of fairness..... — Preceding unsigned comment added by Greenmixa (talk • contribs) 02:27, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your edits have been contested by other users as well, and the criteria for inclusion or criticism and support of ACL's action has been an long contested debate, therefore it would be best for this conversation to take place on the ACL talk page, where other users can join in on the debate. I will move the conversation there. Also in the future please sign your comments with 4 ~'s like this ~~~~ Freikorp (talk) 02:33, 11 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'm EagerToddler39. Freikorp, thanks for creating Revolving Door (song)!

I've just tagged the page, using our page curation tools, as having some issues to fix. You base information on the reception of the song solely on what a Christian Genze. Other opinions needed to ensure a fair article.

The tags can be removed by you or another editor once the issues they mention are addressed. If you have questions, you can leave a comment on my talk page. Or, for more editing help, talk to the volunteers at the Teahouse.

Hello! Your submission of Losing Chase at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! --GDuwenTell me! 15:10, 26 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

--GDuwenTell me! 18:17, 27 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 2 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Losing Chase, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Kevin Bacon made his debut as a director in 1996 with the Golden Globe Award winning television film Losing Chase? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Losing Chase. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 2 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Soft and Hard Adult Film and Television Awards at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! (Sorry, I meant to post this when I reviewed the nomination, but apparently never hit the "save" button...). Canadian Paul 22:05, 3 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey there, sorry for the late response but I wanted to get a third opinion first. It's true that I didn't read the entire article at Slutdrop, so I didn't want it to appear as though I was defending a mistaken revert. But besides the initial reasoning given, there are other problems with linking to Slutdrop. It is very tangentially related, and only by an opinionated claim made by someone at the Guardian. No one has explicitly made the connection between Slutwalks and Slutdrops in the sources. That's why I don't think it's an appropriate addition to the article at this time, with the sources available. PraetorianFury (talk) 17:28, 8 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. If you had of reverted it saying "this is only tangentially related" I would have just let it go, it was just the fact you incorrectly stated it had nothing with reclaiming the word pushed one of my buttons a bit. Thanks for getting a third opinion; no hard feelings. Freikorp (talk) 01:45, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 9 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Slutdrop, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the origins of the dance move slutdrop can be traced back to music videos such as Dirrty by Christina Aguilera? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Slutdrop. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:02, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Sandy MacGregor, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Sandy MacGregor considered himself to be the first western soldier in the Vietnam War to explore the Cu Chi tunnels? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sandy MacGregor. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 07:01, 12 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 13 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article The Discipline of Market Leaders, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the authors of The Discipline of Market Leaders were accused of purchasing thousands of copies of their own book, in order to get the book on The New York Times Best Seller list? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Discipline of Market Leaders. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:28, 13 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just wanted to say great work overhauling the article, but please note that the awards section will need to be sourced, whether it's one citation used for all of the awards or individual citations as appropriate. While more tedious, the advantage of the latter approach would be that if editors change the awards table later it will still (hopefully) be clear which awards track to which sources. Happy Editing! Doniago (talk) 13:55, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. The awards currently listed that don't have individual references are 6 of the 7 Cesar awards and 1 of the 4 Saturn awards. I'm going to assume the reference I posted on the talk page will be sufficient to cover all of them until someone tells me otherwise; I'll add it to the result column. Freikorp (talk) 14:23, 15 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've found and added a few more individual references, so the only awards currently listed missing an individual reference are the 4 Cesar awards that it was nominated for but didn't win. If it turns out the blanket reference I found fails WP:RS removing those four nominations won't be such a big deal. :) Freikorp (talk) 02:15, 16 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for creating Order of Chiang Chung-Cheng, Freikorp!

Wikipedia editor Gbawden just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

You should consider joining the Orders, Decorations and Medals WikiProject

To reply, leave a comment on Gbawden's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

Hi Gbawden. I appreciate the invite, and I'll take a look at the project once I've tied up all the things on my to-do list. I thought I should let you know that I am certainly no subject matter expert on awards though. I created the 'Order of Wen-Hu' as I had created the page for R.V.C. Bodley, who won the award, and I found enough references to start a page for the award whilst searching for references on Bodley. I then created the other 4 awards as somebody added the 'Republic of China honours system' template to the Wen-Hu article, and the fact that the template was almost completely full or redlinks at the time annoyed me to the point of doing something about it :) Freikorp (talk) 01:20, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Blockbuster Entertainment Awards, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after running for seven consecutive years, the Blockbuster Entertainment Awards were cancelled in November 2001 following security concerns after the September 11 attacks? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Harrias ^talk 00:23, 21 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article What Remains, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Sally Mann dug up the body of her dead pet greyhound and photographed it for her photo-book What Remains? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/What Remains. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

SpinningSpark 01:27, 22 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I want to thank you for your last post at this discussion.  It was unusually helpful to my understanding.  Regarding the closing, I find it incomprehensible.  FYI, Unscintillating (talk) 00:59, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, it retrospect I should have just boldly redirected the article instead of nominating for deletion. Considering the official website is clearly offline (leaving me wondering if the magazine is even still produced or not) which means the only sources the article had to begin with are now dead, I have redirected the article back to Lake Forest College anyway. If you think that is not appropriate feel free to let me know, I am happy to discuss the matter. Freikorp (talk) 01:13, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Being dead doesn't change the fact that they are sources, it just makes it harder to locate copies.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I support your bold redirect.  Coming after a keep closure, I think any objection needs to be given due respect.  Such seems unlikely since there are no known secondary sources, but time will tell.  Unscintillating (talk) 02:00, 23 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Soft and Hard Adult Film and Television Awards, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Soft and Hard Adult Film and Television Awards are the only pornographic film awards in the UK to have winners determined by public votes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Soft and Hard Adult Film and Television Awards. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 00:04, 25 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for creating Revolution Overdrive: Songs of Liberty, Freikorp!

Wikipedia editor Falkirks just reviewed your page, and wrote this note for you:

I reviewed your page and passed it. Great article. Just a reminder that it is an orphan and you should add links to it.

To reply, leave a comment on Falkirks's talk page.

Learn more about page curation.

On 31 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kaboom: The Suicide Bombing Game, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the aim of the computer game Kaboom: The Suicide Bombing Game is to kill and injure as many men, women and children as possible? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kaboom: The Suicide Bombing Game. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 16:04, 31 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I have now responded to you here--Template:Did you know nominations/National Atlas of the United States. Please take a look at my response and the things that I fixed for this DYK? nomination whenever you'll have the time. Thank you very much. Futurist110 (talk) 00:57, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Good work at Narsinghpur page Aditya Nema (talk) 04:05, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome. :) Freikorp (talk) 08:56, 3 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article You Can't Stop Me, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that plans for an elephant to appear in the Guano Apes' circus-themed music video "You Can't Stop Me" were cancelled after the elephant's owner threatened a rival circus family? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/You Can't Stop Me. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 6 June 2013 (UTC)

I have granted file mover rights to your account following either a request for those rights or a clear need for the ability to move files. For information on the file mover rights and under what circumstances it is okay to move files, see Wikipedia:File mover. If you do not want file mover rights anymore, just let me know, and I'll remove it. Good luck and thanks. INeverCry 21:00, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

	The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
	"My" list of drug-related deaths has you as a guardian angel. Thank you for all your hard work. Paul, in Saudi (talk) 10:23, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Why thank you, again :). It certainly is nice to get recognition for the article. Come to think of it I haven't worked on converting the list of potential candidates on the article's talk page over to the actual article for a while now. I think I'll start working on that again soon. I gave up on my idea of writing a book about drug-related deaths. It was getting too difficult to find offline sources, not to mention it was time consuming, plus I knew I'd never make my money back (I was just doing it out of interest) so I figured I'd just stick to writing about in on wiki. Freikorp (talk) 01:08, 12 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 12 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Eugene Tonkonogy, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that whilst in his 70s, entrepreneur Eugene Tonkonogy fulfilled a lifelong ambition of marching in the Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade as a clown, and continued to do so every year for twenty years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Eugene Tonkonogy. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 19:33, 12 June 2013 (UTC)

Congrats man. And I know where the connection came from.  ;) 71.246.157.102 (talk) 00:28, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

:) Freikorp (talk) 04:07, 5 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The book is "Who Killed Leigh Leigh?" by Kerry Carrington. I bought it from Amazon a month ago. It gives further information about the murder but it was published in 1998. I'm interested in this murder case also. It's kinda weird because I'm from Turkey and I've never been to Australia actually. (talk) 15:47, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, but understandable, I've taken interest in several articles regarding incidents on the other side of the planet. Anyway thanks a lot for the information :). Freikorp (talk) 00:43, 10 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On 3 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article La Promenade du sceptique, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the only copy of the book La Promenade du sceptique by Denis Diderot was confiscated by police on two occasions? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/La Promenade du sceptique. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 3 September 2013 (UTC)

Special Report: Maintenance tools Article news: Work done and where you can help

Project news: Article cleanup and categorization

Delivered by User:EdwardsBot on behalf of WikiProject Punk. You are receiving this because your user name is listed at Wikipedia:WikiProject Punk music/Zine/Recipients (if you would like to stop these sorts of updates please remove your name from the page). Thanks.

Cheers,

benzband (talk) & Guerillero | My Talk 04:33, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Dirrty Slutdrop.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Files for deletion. Please see the discussion to see why it has been listed (you may have to search for the title of the image to find its entry). Feel free to add your opinion on the matter below the nomination. Thank you. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 19:07, 18 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers for the notification. Freikorp (talk) 10:42, 20 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a regular volunteer at the Third Opinion project. Your request has been removed due to the lack of any recent, much less thorough, talk page discussion about the dispute. Indeed, there's an argument to be made that when there's been no editing or discussion about a dispute for a considerable period of time that consensus by silence or by acquiescence has occurred and that there is no longer a dispute at all. Consensus can, of course, change: you can raise the issue again at the article talk page or start a request for comments, and if you come to an impasse then try dispute resolution, but at this point in time there's really nothing for dispute resolution to handle. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:52, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the information. Freikorp (talk) 22:34, 12 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:Ralph (magazine).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 15:51, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Issue resolved. For some reason even though the image was being used on an article it was not counted as such. I managed to fix this issue be changing the way the image was formatted on the associated article. Thanks for letting me know. Freikorp (talk) 00:54, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. --173.59.201.71 (talk) 16:49, 25 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just for archival purposes i'd like to mention that this discussion was closed before I was made aware of its existence. Freikorp (talk) 00:52, 28 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Freikorp, you were asking about a reliable source for my edit? will this do? I am a bit new to this editing stuff! It is a statement form their website... http://www.accessministries.org.au/news/id/19 Integrity+accuracy (talk) 05:52, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It's a little bit of a grey area because it's a a self-published source with an obvious bias on the subject. As per WP:SELFPUB, a self-published source, such as the Access Ministries official website, cannot be used to say anything about itself that is unduly self-serving. On one hand Access' claim that schools were simply not counted on the census is plausible. On the other hand Access have a vested interest in keeping their supporters morale high, so we also have to take into considerate that they may be stretching the truth to keep their supporters happy. The information currently in the article regarding the drop in attendance is presented as an accepted fact because it comes from a third party source that has no obvious bias on the subject (whether they are correct or not is irrelevant, they are an unbiased source so whatever they say will have much more weight than any primary source). Third party sources are ALWAYS preferred to primary sources. However since the claim is not outrageous, and it is a direct response to the media coverage already reported in the article, so as long as we present the information as according to Access Ministries, as opposed to an accepted fact, it should be fine, but others may disagree with me.

As you have no doubt noticed, there is currently a lot of criticism about Access Ministries in the article, however, this is perfectly acceptable as all criticism is presented from mainstream third party sources that have no obvious agenda for or against Access Ministries, and each source is only used to support one sentence of information (It could be considered a violation of WP:Undue weight to write several sentences of criticism or praise using one source only). Accordingly if you wish to say favourable things about Access Ministries in the article, you will also have to also find mainstream sources. Christian websites and publications would be considered biased sources if they are used to say anything that promotes Access Ministries or their agenda. This policy swings both ways; I cannot use Atheist publications or activist websites like FIRIS to say anything negative about Access, as they are biased against the subject.

Just a disclaimer, I am a supporter of FIRIS and accordingly I strongly oppose what Access Ministries do, but I have been editing wikipedia for years before I had heard of either Access of FIRIS, and I believe in the concept of Wikipedia, being that it should be a neutral encyclopaedia, free from bias. Naturally I tend to read and edit articles about things that interest me or are important to me, but I always try to do so without letting my feelings override any of wikipedia's guidelines. So if you need any advice on editing the article feel free to ask me. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:56, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hold on. I just noticed something that I missed earlier. Access' numbers don't add up. The source you give does not dispute the mainstream media's original figure of 940 schools, they only dispute the final figure of 666 (their figure is 780), but they say that the fall in attendance was less than 5% over 3 years. A fall from 940 to 780 is a decrease of over 17%, not less than 5%. I think this is extremely strong evidence that Access is lying about something (either the number 780 or the percentage fall, one or the other, not sure which). Accordingly I no longer consider this source reliable for anything, and don't feel comfortable about it being used in the article. So my vote on this issue is now currently a 'No'. In my opinion you'll need a better source. Freikorp (talk) 09:21, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has since found a reliable source to back up your statement, so it looks like this issue is resolved now. :) Freikorp (talk) 21:45, 27 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! Just a heads up that I removed your plot summary tag on In the Name of the King. I did a new plot summary completely from scratch that comes out of my local copy's word count as 4004 bytes and 618 words. Check it out, please! Featherwinglove (talk) 02:58, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. It looks pretty good. Having not seen the film, I can't comment on how accurate it is or isn't (I found the article simply by looking through other films by Uwe Boll, having been a fan of his film Rampage, and upon noticing how overly long the old plot was simply added the tag.) Anyway, well done. Keep up the good work. Freikorp (talk) 06:13, 17 March 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:The Fifth Element album cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG (talk) 15:01, 19 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. The image was removed from the article in question by another user, citing MOS:FILM. I am not contesting its removal or subsequent nomination for deletion. Freikorp (talk) 11:23, 20 April 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Your DYK review is incomplete. Please see nomination page. Thanks, Yoninah (talk) 17:26, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Ditto for Template:Did you know nominations/Mischief Makers. Yoninah (talk) 17:28, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for letting me know. Last time I reviewed for DYK (some time ago) I don't believe articles upgraded to GA were eligible for nomination. I assumed they would follow the same standards as new articles. I'll review what needs to be looked at this afternoon, and hopefully i'll be able to review it properly. Freikorp (talk) 23:39, 25 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. We are seeing a number of GA nominations lately that do not meet DYK criteria, especially in the area of close paraphrasing. Some reviewers use the Dup Detector tool located to the right of the hook on the template page to check for close paraphrasing; I personally look up the sources and compare the writing. In the case of Mischief Makers, the page creator is copying words and sentence structure a lot. That's okay if he would quote them directly, but to follow the language in the sources so closely is a cause for concern at DYK. Best, Yoninah (talk) 21:31, 26 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Staircase model at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:52, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notification. I believe i've now resolved the issue. Freikorp (talk) 04:59, 30 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Staircase model, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that there are six floors in the staircase model of terrorism? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Staircase model. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:21, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Congratulations for promoting Staircase model to the Main Page. It is a very interesting article. Good job and happy editing! ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 16:20, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much, it was actually the first new article i'd written in several months. :) I had just recently heard about the model and was surprised to not find an article on wikipedia about it already. Freikorp (talk) 18:02, 1 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great! I'm glad I got the chance to read it. Keep up the good work. ComputerJA (☎ • ✎) 03:48, 2 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 14 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Death in the West, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the film Death in the West contains what is believed to be the first recorded admission from a tobacco company representative that smoking causes health problems? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Death in the West. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 16:02, 14 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just create a new nominations page for it. Though this time I would strongly advise you not to use any pictures with the nom. The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 07:03, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for replying. Mandarax actually just reopened it, but I agree, the picture was a bad call. Certainly won't be pushing to have one included in the article. Freikorp (talk) 07:26, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Another editor has questioned the hook. Would you mind looking at ALT1? Thanks for your review, Yoninah (talk) 13:57, 2 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 July 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Anthony Kelly (martial artist), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Arrow Catcher claims to live on a diet of just meat and potatoes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Anthony Kelly (martial artist). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 03:48, 6 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've not really participated in FARs before, it occurs to me it might be considered bad form to make copyedits to an article currently under review at FAR. (Is that right, and I should only doc my ce suggestions at the FAR page? Or?) Thx for guidance. Ihardlythinkso (talk) 06:49, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is my first FAR, so i'm not 100% sure. Thanks for making those copy edits. I don't see any problem with it myself, considering they are only minor changes. By all means though, if there are additional things which you believe could be improved and you don't have the time to do it, feel free to simply mention them on the FAR page and i'll make the changes, otherwise I don't see any harm in simply doing it yourself. Whilst I have your attention, if you happen to believe this article is worthy of featured status, if you could voice your support on it at the FAR page I would be ever so grateful. Freikorp (talk) 07:01, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Well, most of my stuff is picky punc/grammar/expression stuff, and for me just doing those edits is simpler than explaining suggestions for them, but I see even minor copyedit suggestions are documented in FAR comments, so I was wondering if that was protocol and to avoid creating a moving target. I was reading the general FAR doc pages for answer to my Q re protocol, didn't find anything, but it seemed perhaps likely that making changes to something being reviewed might be probably bad form. But I did find in that doc that newish reviewers should leave Oppose/Support !voting to seasoned reviewers and instead use only Comment, so I better follow that and not !vote. Ok, Ihardlythinkso (talk) 07:41, 20 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Murder of Leigh Leigh you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ohconfucius -- Ohconfucius (talk) 05:01, 24 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Heads up: not having had any response to my initial request, I made another request at User talk:Protonk. Let's hope we can get this wrapped up soon. Regards, -- Ohc ^¡digame! 04:18, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've attempted to address the points you raised in your review of the above article; I think I've covered everything you noted, with the exception of the missing image point (which I've decided not to touch myself because I'm not comfortable with the idea of uploading images and related copyright status issues). I'm not sure what the subsequent process is (this was the first time I'd every nominated an article for GA status). Please have a look and then let me know where to go from here (and BTW, thanks for reviewing the article and congratulations on your first review).Vulcan's Forge (talk) 02:38, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi again. Your improvements look good to me. As this is my first review, I have contacted a mentor to look at my review and make any comments before passing I the article. :) Freikorp (talk) 07:49, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've gotten the advice from the mentor. Please see my final suggestion at the review. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 13:33, 31 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mya (program), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Mya choked up during a demo for president Bill Clinton? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mya (program). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Graeme Bartlett (talk) 13:08, 6 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Murder of Leigh Leigh you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Murder of Leigh Leigh for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ohconfucius -- Ohconfucius (talk) 02:02, 8 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings! You are hereby invited to WikiProject Autism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of autism, Asperger syndrome, and Autistic culture on Wikipedia. As the project emphasizes contribution from autistic editors, it is especially interested in you, who have chosen to list yourself as a Wikipedian with Asperger syndrome. Muffinator (talk) 04:26, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia ads	file info – #251

Thanks for the invite. I am interested, however, all my editing attention is currently being focused on promoting two articles to featured status. I'll consider joining the project once they are either accepted or rejected, and are accordingly no longer taking up all of my editing time. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:21, 11 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations to you for your work in this article. I'm glad that this article is nominated for DYK. I'm still interested in this murder but I haven't got any further information since last year. I realised that there isn't any video footage on the Internet about this case and last year, I sent an e - mail to Crime and Investigation Australia for the possibility of making a documentary of it. They replied me that they'll see. Also I wanted to look some old articles from Newcastle Herald and I sent an e - mail to them too, but they hadn't replied. So, as I'm living in Turkey, I have no other choice that having further information. I'm so glad that you got the book and used it for improving this article. I think you did a great job. :)MaddyRockFan (talk) 22:19, 12 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I spent a lot of time researching and writing the article. I have access to to the Newcastle Herald's archives thanks to being a university student. There are 159 articles in the Newcastle Herald's archives that mention Leigh Leigh, albeit some of them only mention her briefly. If you give me your email address, I might be able to download some of them and send them to you. Also please only comment on my current talk page, archived pages are not supposed to be modified; accordingly i've moved your comment here :) Freikorp (talk) 10:02, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for writing the old message in wrong place. I've found some articles in the Newcastle Herald archive but they were from after 1995. I'm looking for the articles from 1989 or 1990. My e - mail address is irazsu@hotmail.com . Thanks for your helping. :) MaddyRockFan (talk) 16:46, 13 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It appears the archive I have access to only goes back to 1997. I'm guessing the only way to find articles further back than that would be on microfilm; i'll look into it and see if I can find out more next time I actually go to my university library. It's somewhat amazing that 159 articles in the Newcastle Herald have at least mentioned Leigh Leigh since 1997; it gives you a good indication of the impact her death had on the region. Freikorp (talk) 02:41, 14 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for looking, I hope you'll find. I've sent a mail to Newcastle Herald for online archive last year, but nobody replied. The Sydney Morning Herald has an online archive on Internet and last year I've got some articles from that. I've noticed too that there is so many article about Leigh in 1997 - 1998, maybe because of Kerry Carrington's book, which was published on 1998. Thanks again. MaddyRockFan (talk) 19:06, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I sent you an email with some good news; let's communicate via email from now on :). Freikorp (talk) 04:49, 19 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of Murder of Leigh Leigh at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 00:27, 15 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Murder of Leigh Leigh, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the murder of 14-year-old schoolgirl Leigh Leigh inspired a theatrical play that was later adapted into a feature film? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Murder of Leigh Leigh. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Thanks from the Wiki and I for your contribution Victuallers (talk) 11:10, 21 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just noticed this in the list of new articles. My first thought was "this song didn't have an article?" and my second thought was "I gotta say good job to the person who created it!" Keep up the good work! AtHomeIn神戸 (talk) 08:49, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks AtHomeIn神戸. I was listening to the song earlier today when I decided to look up its article, and was also surprised to see it didn't have one. :) Freikorp (talk) 12:47, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the hook in Prep 4 as I can't imagine what a "radio song" is, but I thought I'd let you know as might want to object to my high-handed, devil-may-care, swashbuckling prep editing style. (obviously I'm in a pirate mood today, me hearty, so if you do take issue with it, shipmate, watch out for the black spot from Cap'n Belle. Arrrrrr! [cough]) Belle (talk) 13:12, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, your change makes more sense. I always enjoy your antics, have a nice day =D. Freikorp (talk) 13:30, 28 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 30 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Polyester Girl, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Australian hit song "Polyester Girl" is about a man "pledging fidelity to a sex doll"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Polyester Girl. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:21, 29 August 2014 (UTC) 12:03, 30 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I procedurally declined your PROD on Murray Lee Smith, but I have taken it back into AfD, if you wish to comment, Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Murray Lee Smith (2nd nomination). Safiel (talk) 20:50, 4 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Test Australia: The National IQ Test, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the National IQ Test assessed whether people who support Aussie rules are more intelligent than those who follow rugby league? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Test Australia: The National IQ Test. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:02, 26 September 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Punisher (1993 video game) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Punisher (1993 video game) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ugog Nizdast -- Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:02, 2 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Azúcar Amarga, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that a scene in the film Azúcar Amarga showing people deliberately infecting themselves with HIV to protest against the Cuban government is based on actual events? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 12:03, 4 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Your submission of The Punisher (1993 video game) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! czar ♔ 20:02, 5 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Freikorp. I saw your note at WT:VG and I checked my copies of the magazine. Indeed there is a small infobox about the game in Issue 72 at page 52 and the quotation is accurate. The full citation is this:

• McFerran, Damien. "The Making Of... Dungeons & Dragons - Best Brawlers: Punisher (1993)". Retro Gamer. Issue 72. Pg.52. 2010. ISSN 17423155.

No idea why this is part of a D&D article but that probably explains why the eBay seller couldn't find it. In addition there is minor coverage in a few other issues where the PAL version of the game is discussed in relation to its rarity. So in Issue #20, the magazine notes that the game normally sells for over £30 on the secondary market. Then in Issue #112 it is listed alongside four other games as the "Mega Drive Top Rarest PAL Games" where the text states "Capcom arrived all too late to add another side scrolling beat-'em-up to their catalogue, leaving The Punisher to sell in small quantities, despite being and enjoyable brawler." The citations for these claims are listed here:

• Phillips, Simon, ed. "Retro Price Listings: Bargain Hunt - Retro Auction Watch: The Punisher". Retro Gamer. Issue 20. Pg.103. 2005. ISSN 17423155.
• Buchanan, Adam. "The Collector's Guide: Sega Mega Drive - Top Rarest PAL Games: The Punisher". Retro Gamer. Issue 112. Pg.76. 2013. ISSN 17423155.

There are a few other tiny mentions in other issues, but nothing very usable in the article. I'm not even sure if these factoids can be worked into the article, but if they can then great. Good luck with the article! -Thibbs (talk) 04:09, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for that information, I really appreciate it. :) Freikorp (talk) 10:45, 16 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 24 October 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Punisher (1993 video game), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that The Punisher can be distinguished from other beat 'em up games by its frequent use of firearms? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Punisher (1993 video game). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:29, 24 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

{{Admin help}} As per my last DYK nomination, I was told to "use the move function instead of copy-pasting from [my] sandbox [next time I create an article]." Curious, I gave it a go, except now the new article I created (Saumarez Homestead) embarrassingly contains the 4 years of edit history of my sandbox. Can someone please delete the history of this new article previous to the page move? You don't have to restore the sandbox history to its original location - there's nothing in the history that is useful to me, i'd just rather not have my sandbox history on public display. Another user has since kindly explained to me when and when not to use the move function. Thanks. Freikorp (talk) 04:14, 1 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Give me 5 mins and I'll sort it out. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:16, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Saumarez Homestead only has the correct history. User:Freikorp/subpage has all the "old stuff" - add {{db-u1}} to the top of the page, if you want it deleted. FWIW - you might find it easier to use the proposed article name as the subpage name, so the last one would have been User:Freikorp/Saumarez Homestead, then after it gets moved, you won't need to use the page again, and the redirect left can be just deleted on request. Ronhjones  ^(Talk) 00:30, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot. Freikorp (talk) 02:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This request for help from administrators has been answered. If you need more help or have additional questions, please reapply the {{admin help}} template, or contact the responding user(s) directly on their own user talk page.

Hello. I need an administrator to un-protect the page Trent from Punchy from being created. The article has been blocked from creation since 2008, and since then not only has the subject made more appearances but considerably more reliable sources have also mentioned him. I intend to copy-paste my subpage into said article: see [2]. I apologise if there is a more appropriate way to request this; I have not had this issue before. Thank you. Freikorp (talk) 05:06, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 10:18, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. :) Freikorp (talk) 10:51, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi User:Philg88. Sorry to be a pain, but can you also unblock Talk:Trent from Punchy and Trent From Punchy (I intend to redirect the latter to the newly created article. Thanks again. Freikorp (talk) 11:05, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. I've created the redirect but you'll need to create/sort out the now unprotected talk page with banners etc. Cheers,  Philg88 ^♦talk 15:58, 8 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 10 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Titanica, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Titanica was the second feature-length IMAX film released, and included footage of the wreck of the RMS Titanic taken using two Mir submersibles? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Titanica. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 10 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

For your request on the Lum You article, I'd say that it meets the criteria for length if you believe that the article has reasonably covered the topic. For articles like this based on the subject matter, it may be difficult to find sources to further expand the article. I typically look into the citations provided if readily accessible and see if the editors have covered the main elements of the article. Usually a quick Google search will help point out if there is something else to be covered. I may also come at it from a different angle, suggesting additional sections that could be added, and allow the editors time to expand if necessary. If you've approached this review by considering these and there is no further expansion that can be reasonably added, then the length should be sufficient for GA. If the editors are continuing on to FA, they'll likely need to make sure they've exhausted all potential sources. Let me know if that helps or if you want additional input. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 00:56, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I found this book source that may be used for additional detail to expand the article if it has not already been considered. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 01:00, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of NinjaRobotPirate -- NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 19:02, 21 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've addressed some but not all of your concerns (specifically, looking into 3A will take a little while), so please give me a bit more time and don't close the GA yet. Thanks, It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 00:30, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. As long as the article is being worked on i'll leave it open. I'd only close it after seven days of no reply and or action taken. Freikorp (talk) 02:31, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think that's everything now? It Is Me Here ^{t / c} 11:59, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I passed it. Well done. Freikorp (talk) 13:14, 26 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 25 November 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Saumarez Homestead, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Saumarez Homestead contains a thirty-room Edwardian mansion, and has hosted fashion shows and a film festival? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Saumarez Homestead. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 13:08, 25 November 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This is to inform you that Murder of Leigh Leigh, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 18 December 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton (talk) 14:19, 2 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article Mya (program) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mya (program) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Spinningspark -- Spinningspark (talk) 10:03, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of The Fifth Element to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA) appear as "Today's featured article" soon (either on a particular date or on any available date), please nominate it at the requests page. If you'd like to see an FA appear on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with about 1,287 articles waiting their turn at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. I ought to have congratulated you earlier on the promotion of the Leigh Leigh article, which will be TFA soon. Excellent work. Best wishes, Bencherlite^Talk 10:32, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. It was a rather stressful nomination process. I nominated The Fifth Element and shortly thereafter my GA reviewer for the Leigh Leigh article nominated it also, so I had two FACs going at once, which kept me busy. Let's just say i'm not in any rush to nominate anything else for featured status, though i'll probably nominate The Fifth Element for TFA once I finish it; i'm waiting on a library book to come in which I think will help a lot with the production section of the article. :) Freikorp (talk) 11:54, 3 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 6 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that test screening participants for the film The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc asked, "Why does she have to die at the end?" The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/The Messenger: The Story of Joan of Arc. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:02, 6 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I really appreciate your work, making Hard Candy a good article. I didn't believe it has much chance, my english isn't fluent and I'm not familiar with the english version of wikipedia (I mainly edit in my native language, Hebrew). Thank you for reviewing, guiding and editing, as a partner in this mission and as a reader, among millions over the world, who appreciate good articles. Uziel302 (talk) 14:03, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've notice you did great work on the "Accolades" paragraph. I recommend looking on the relevant page on IMDb [3], I don't know if it's necessary to add the full list to the article but maybe 4 awards at Málaga Film Festival is worth mentioning. At least the production company mentions these awards. Uziel302 (talk) 21:15, 8 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, and thanks for pointing out the awards at the Málaga Film Festival; its a good idea to add all the notable awards a film won/was nominated for to wikipedia, providing you have a reliable reference. IMDb is a good source for finding out what awards a film won, but it generally isn't considered reliable for wikipedia as content is user generated and is accordingly sometimes incorrect. The Vulcan productions website is a good source for the awards though; I just added the awards to the article using that source. I'm going to nominate this article to appear in the Did You Know section on the main page. :) Freikorp (talk) 04:55, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You can view the nomination here: Template:Did you know nominations/Hard Candy (film). Just in case you didn't know just be advised that as you were the good article nominator you are not eligible to review the DYK nomination due to a conflict of interest. You are welcome, however, to suggest an alternate hook for the nomination. Freikorp (talk) 06:24, 9 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Freikorps,

I have reviewed the above, and it is ready to go. Please pardon my minor editing in aid of the cause of ALT1. This is an interesting book, and I will probably get it through my library. Thank you for both a well-written and easily reviewed article, as well as a lead to a good read.

Georgejdorner (talk) 07:27, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You're welcome; I enjoyed writing it. Naturally I read Tirado's original post that went viral, and an excerpt of the book that was available online, but I haven't actually read the book myself yet. I think i'll borrow it from my library as well :). Freikorp (talk) 07:56, 12 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for expanding this article. Great work! Do you have plans to nominate the article for Good status? I'm all for it, unless you think additional expansion is required to fully cover the event. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 15:29, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Another Believer. No worries, I enjoyed reading the sources and expanding the article. I nominated the article for DYK. I'd like it to both feature at DYK and expand it a bit more before nominating it for GA. I'll go through each one of those sourcess you listed on the articles talk page (cheers for that btw), and once i'm confident that the article has covered every aspect of the shooting i'll consider nominating it. :) Freikorp (talk) 04:46, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Great news! I will keep an eye on the article and try to help when and where I can, too. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 14:57, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Not sure if you have an interest in the White House or D.C. crime in particular, but if you liked working on the 2011 White House shooting article you might also look into Omar J. Gonzalez or Dominic Adesanya. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 07:10, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Update: Collection of sources in roughly chronological order at Talk:Dominic Adesanya. ---Another Believer _(Talk) 18:54, 28 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 15 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Le Dernier Combat, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that director Luc Besson's debut feature film Le Dernier Combat contained only two words of dialogue? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Le Dernier Combat. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Mike V • Talk 20:30, 15 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 16 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hand to Mouth: Living in Bootstrap America, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the book Hand to Mouth: Living in Bootstrap America contains a chapter entitled "I've Got Way Bigger Problems Than a Spinach Salad Can Solve"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hand to Mouth: Living in Bootstrap America. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 21:00, 16 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just discovered that it was you who wrote the article Murder of Leigh Leigh. It's quite well written. I just spent two hours reading it carefully and making a number of minor edits. However, I haven't saved them yet. I know, as the article's author, you might cringe at the thought of a lot of edits, but I assure you that mine are all minor and that you would be happy with most, if not all, of them. Would you mind reading the comment I left at User talk:Magioladitis#Murder of Leigh Leigh? As I've been waiting for a reply, a few additional edits have been made. I hate to lose all the work I have done. Can you suggest a solution that does not involve saving each edit individually, which would take quite a bit of time? CorinneSD (talk) 00:24, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I must have been looking at the revision history for another article. But the issue is the same. If I save all my edits, all the edits that have been made to the article in the last 40 minutes will disappear. Can those edits, which are quite short and simple, be made again after I save my edits? CorinneSD (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi CorinneSD. Yes that's fine, I just noticed your comment and edits. It will be easy enough to make those simple edits again; i'll start doing them now. Thanks. :) Freikorp (talk) 01:12, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you just beat me to it, cheers lol :) Freikorp (talk) 01:13, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

And I got "Edit Conflict" twice trying to tell you what I had just done. Are you happy with my edits to the article? If not, feel free to change them. CorinneSD (talk) 01:15, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just had a quick look. In my opinion some of them are definitely improvements, i'm indifferent about others and some I liked how they were better before. Also there's no way you could of known this but some of the words (for example one instance of 'likely' instead of 'probably') were chosen because the original source said 'probably', and I had to choose a different word to avoid close paraphrasing. I'll go over them again later today once the article is off the main page (and receiving less edits lol) and probably make some minor adjustments. Thanks for your interest in the article. Freikorp (talk) 01:27, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. That's fine. The reason I changed "likely" to "probably" is because it was used as an adverb, and, strictly speaking, "likely" is an adjective (so modifies a noun and is often used with BE -- as in "That's a likely story."), not an adverb. A lot of Americans use "likely" as an adverb, but no Brit would. There was one instance of "likely" that I did not change because it was used correctly as an adjective. It's completely your call whether and how you want to use the word, though. CorinneSD (talk) 02:04, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you, this made my day. :) Freikorp (talk) 07:31, 19 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 21 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Trent from Punchy, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that there were "countless" debates over the authenticity of Trent from Punchy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Trent from Punchy. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Harrias ^talk 00:03, 21 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 22 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hard Candy (film), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that a New York Times Magazine writer described Ellen Page's performance in the 2005 film Hard Candy as her artistic breakthrough performance that "almost no one noticed"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hard Candy (film). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Harrias ^talk 00:01, 22 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for uploading File:The Spirits Within album cover.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image 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 images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. Stefan2 (talk) 00:27, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Just for the record I deleted this picture from the article Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within as it goes against the consensus at MOS:FILM#Soundtrack. Freikorp (talk) 01:18, 24 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

On 26 December 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2011 White House shooting, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that it took the Secret Service four days to realize that bullets had struck the White House on 11 November 2011? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2011 White House shooting. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Harrias ^talk 12:01, 26 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]