This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Peer reviews with no or minimal feedback |
---|
|
|
If your review is not in the list of unanswered reviews, add it . |
Welcome to my talk page. Please leave me a message below and I will generally reply on your talk page. Although my email address is enabled, I do not check often (so I may be slow in replying to email and very much prefer to have conversations here). Please note that while I am glad to do a peer review on just about any article, it will often take me several days, and I do not have the time to do copyedits (sorry). If you want me to review an article, please open a peer review on it. Thanks for stopping by and happy editing! Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:01, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
You should check back on the PR, I've cut up a lot of your issues and started some intensive copyediting. As I see it the lead past the first para needs rewriting, modern studies needs work, and I still have to figure out what Avenue tells me I've missed. You know any good copyeditors I could enlist? On an unrelated note, I miss the little critters on your page. ResMar 04:07, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
Some time has passed. A number of changes have been made. Would you please make a new review of this article? - Denimadept (talk) 00:44, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
I have found two articles, both are orphans, and in at least one case, I question it's notability- Garo Gaboudagian. It is an orphan, has no sources, and no corresponding article in any other language Wikipedia. The second one, when I found it, was a mix of a photo of Chennai in India, and word-for-word text from the only source available in serious copyright violation. I left more commentary on the talk page for that one. Thanks for your help. --Leahtwosaints (talk) 15:16, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch - I have a question, though not entirely sure you know the answer. Would you happen to know what the mucus skin (?) that surrounds a trout is called? I'm working on Hemingway's "Big Two-Hearted River" (a river page!) and the character's delicacy in releasing the fish without harm is an important point. Having spent my share of time blissfully waiting for a trout to bite, I understand how carefully fish must be released, but don't expect most people to know. Anyway, just fishing for an answer (sorry, very corny, but couldn't resist). Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 03:03, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch, this is just to let you know that Chrisye (which you helped peer review) has been nominated at FAC. If you would like to participate in the discussion it would be appreciated. Crisco 1492 (talk) 08:30, 5 March 2012 (UTC)
Meyersdale has some edits that need to be deleted. They are rude, crude, and vulgar. Gerry D (talk) 01:29, 7 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch. I have a level-4 vital Madagascar-related article up at FAC and it isn't attracting any attention. It's the biography of the last Prime Minister of the 19th century Kingdom of Madagascar, who carried the island to the modern age before being exiled by the conquering French colonial army. You always offer such helpful reviews. I'm hoping you'll take a look at it Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates#Rainilaiarivony here if you have a chance. Cheers, Lemurbaby (talk) 06:10, 8 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, this one is back at FAC, you supported first time out. It failed through ennui last time, not though fault, hope you'll weigh in on the renewed effort here. Many thanks,--Wehwalt (talk) 09:43, 9 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to let you know that I have submitted Steamtown National Historic Site for GA review. I think it is ready. I removed the restoration section and put it on the talk page for discussion or improvement (because it was problematic and I think the only think keeping it from GA.). I would like to see us both get credit when this passes review. Take Care, --Ishtar456 (talk) 13:51, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
Well, McDade is in there in the Nationalization section. I do not think that the article is much good without the other sections. I did not want to have to rewrite it, but I will. I will try to get it done before the review. If I don't finish I will withdraw it. --Ishtar456 (talk) 18:04, 11 March 2012 (UTC)
IvoShandor (talk) 08:13, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Ernest Shackleton know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 17, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 17, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Ernest Shackleton (1874–1922) was an Anglo-Irish polar explorer, one of the principal figures of the Heroic Age of Antarctic Exploration. His first experience of the polar regions was as third officer on Captain Robert Falcon Scott’s Discovery Expedition, 1901–04, from which he was sent home early on health grounds. Determined to make amends for this perceived personal failure, he returned to Antarctica in 1907 as leader of the Nimrod Expedition. In January 1909 he and three companions made a southern march which established a record Farthest South latitude at 88° 23′ S, 190 km from the South Pole. For this achievement, Shackleton was knighted by King Edward VII on his return home. After the race to the South Pole ended in 1912 with Roald Amundsen's conquest, Shackleton turned his attention to what he said was the one remaining great object of Antarctic journeying—the crossing of the continent from sea to sea, via the pole. To this end he made preparations for what became the Imperial Trans-Antarctic Expedition, 1914–17. Disaster struck this expedition when its ship, Endurance, became trapped in pack ice and was slowly crushed before the shore parties could be landed. There followed a sequence of exploits, and an ultimate escape with no lives lost, that would eventually assure Shackleton's heroic status. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 14 March 2012 (UTC)
for peer reviewing Aalen, and I’ve put the FA backlog on my watchlist so I can help if any topic I’m familiar too appears there. --dealerofsalvation 16:44, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
My huge thanks to you for your invaluable suggestions for the Doon School page. I will take each of your points one at a time and work thoroughly on it. I'd just like to clarify one of the points - the info about Doon's network being second-most influential in 1990 after Harvard has the Economic Times (ET) reference because, in fact, it was mentioned by the ET in that article (mentioning the Economist). Though I'm still looking for a primary source and will add, when i find it. But, really, thanks very much Ruhrfisch for taking the time to review this article. I will work as advised. And also , probably, will come back to knock at your door when I've made the changes you've advised so that you can re-review it. Many thanks once again :) :: Merlaysamuel :: (talk) 17:54, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
They were useful indeed. Working on them...thanks! :: Merlaysamuel :: (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for watching the Shackleton article through its recent TFA. I was nervous about this, given the history of bickering and vandalism that has afflicted it recently, but all went reasonably well, and you handled a couple of points deftly on the talk page.
As to Carmen, can I possibly snatch a few minutes of your reviewing time and ask you to look over the image and soundfiles, and to note any possible issues on the article's peer review page? I don't think there is anything problematic, but I like to be sure. I have not been of much assistance on the PR backlog lately; I have been reviewing, but mainly at the requests of editors on articles that have not yet reached the backlog. I will try to make some inroads over the next few days, as I see it's over 20 again. Brianboulton (talk) 11:45, 18 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for leaving the "£" symbol - I was not looking to enter into a edit war or looking to cause trouble!
Many thanks
Alphacatmarnie (talk) 11:24, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for committing to the peer review of deep vein thrombosis. I did feed the peer review gods with comments at the Wikipedia:Peer review/Spinal stenosis/archive1, which was backlogged, but I hesitate to remove it from the backlog list because I didn't add the doing template before I started. Thanks again. Biosthmors (talk) 17:56, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
This has been nominated for peer review by an editor who is not a significant contributor. It is clear from the talkpage that there is a content dispute in progress, involving this editor and the main authors. I have pointed out that in these circumstances a peer review is not really appropriate; I think it should be closed until the dispute is resolved. Would you mind looking at it? Brianboulton (talk) 00:09, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch. After a failed FAC, Ahalya is back at FAC and again accused of the same problem of not having "the source material in accessible and coherent language". You have read many articles and given constructive criticism in several PRs. Can you please take a look and highlight the sentences that may suffer this issue on the FAC or talk (wherever it seems appropriate), whenever you get a chance? Thanks. --Redtigerxyz Talk 18:54, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments on the peer review page. This is to let you know I have now closed the review, and nominated at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 17:57, 28 March 2012 (UTC)
Just in case my notice above got buried, I'll double post. I've replied at the FAC. Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:58, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
Could you look briefly at a couple of images, where I have some licencing concerns? They are:-
No particular hurry, but I would value your opinion. Brianboulton (talk) 22:37, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for thePeer review of Bowling Green State University. I worked through the PR and the article and all the suggestions. Thanks for all your help and it is one step closer to GA status. Bhockey10 (talk) 22:51, 10 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for the Review | |
Hi Ruhrfisch, thanks for the review at the recent FA nomination for Chrisye. Your prose edits helped tremendously, and the peer review you gave led me to further research this article. The result is the most complete English-language write-up on the singer in existence. In thanks, I'd like to give you a local brew: Bintang Beer. Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:22, 11 April 2012 (UTC) |
Hey, finally someone graps what I mean, and the fact that we need to get it opened up. Have you any idea where we can take this to get the ball rolling? Mrlittleirish 13:58, 12 April 2012 (UTC)
I have opened a PR page, since (thanks to TRM) the backlog is now of manageable size. I wonder, could you help me with one small aspect? I believe the correct title should be "Tichborne case" (small "c"), but when I tried the move, it was refused on the grounds that the title already existed, presumably in the form of a redirect. I think it requires admin action to effect the change in such circumstances. Brianboulton (talk) 14:01, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
Thanks again Ruhr, you have no idea how much that was appreciated. IvoShandor (talk) 23:02, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
Ahalya says Thanks | |
Thanks for helping the article improve to FA standards by your constructive comments on the PR ! --Redtigerxyz Talk 18:05, 17 April 2012 (UTC) |
Weissport, Pennsylvania needs some attention. The edit is not supported by a google search except for the edit itself. Gerry D (talk) 16:55, 19 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch, hope you're well. Looks like we managed to get the PR backlog down to zero... I wonder when that last happened! Hopefully I'll be able to keep knocking the odd PR out to support when the backlog reappears! On a related note, and I've read your talkpage message, but I was hoping one good turn might deserve another and that you might be kind enough to have a look at a PR on Little Boots that I've listed today? I'm hoping it's in reasonably good condition but of course, one often cannot see the wood for the trees, hence the request! Best wishes, The Rambling Man (talk) 14:54, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
Hi, you'll see I'm editing again. I have closed the Tichborne peer review and nominated the article at FAC. I think the current lead image is defendable, particularly after the minor cleanups; maybe a word or two from you would help if necessary.
Unfortunately, presumably because of the name move during the review, the PR system won't link to the archived review (see redlink on articl talkpage). It seems from the edit history you had some earlier trouble in this respect, but managed to fix it. Can you look at the current problem? Brianboulton (talk) 20:58, 28 April 2012 (UTC)
And thank you for the peer review to DVT. No problem about the delay. I think I've just finally adequately addressed the concerns that were raised. Biosthmors (talk) 05:43, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Just in case you're not keeping busy, we've started a GLAM (Galleries, Libraries, Archives, and Museums) project at Wikipedia:GLAM/Philadelphia Museum of Art. This should be exciting! Please sign up or contribute however you can.
Or check out Outreach.
In any case, it's good to say hello.
Smallbones (talk) 05:36, 9 May 2012 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Fanny Imlay know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on May 14, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 14, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Fanny Imlay (1794–1816) was the illegitimate daughter of the British feminist Mary Wollstonecraft and the American commercial speculator Gilbert Imlay. Although Mary Wollstonecraft and Gilbert Imlay lived together happily for brief periods before and after the birth of Fanny, Imlay left Wollstonecraft in France in the midst of the French Revolution. In an attempt to revive their relationship, she travelled to Scandinavia on business for him, taking the one-year-old Fanny with her, but the affair never rekindled. After falling in love with and marrying the philosopher William Godwin, Wollstonecraft died in childbirth in 1797, leaving the three-year-old Fanny in the hands of Godwin, along with the newborn Mary Wollstonecraft Godwin. Four years later, Godwin remarried and his new wife, Mary Jane Clairmont, brought children of her own into the marriage, most significantly from Fanny Imlay's and Mary Godwin's perspective, Claire Clairmont. Both girls resented the new Mrs Godwin and the attention she paid to her own daughter. The Godwin household became an increasingly uncomfortable place to live as tensions rose and debts mounted. Imlay became increasingly isolated from her family and committed suicide in 1816 at the age of 22.
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 12 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi! I saw you've reviewed images at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Murasaki Shikibu/archive1. Now I found the lead image was authentically incorrect, but Truthkeeper does not agree with me. It would be grateful if you could post your comment at Talk:Murasaki Shikibu#Wrong picture. Thank you. Oda Mari (talk) 08:59, 13 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for that. Looked like a personal attack - here's another from a few days ago - [1]...Modernist (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2012 (UTC)
A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Fanny Imlay is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.
The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Fanny Imlay until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.
Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. --jbmurray (talk • contribs) 14:48, 15 May 2012 (UTC)
Would it be possible for you to look briefly at the images on A Child of Our Time and let me know if you can spot any problems? There are only five of them. I discussed the Bundesarchiv image used in the lead with User: Elcobbola, and he believes that it is fine as far as PD is concerned. The others should not be problematic. Brianboulton (talk) 14:52, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated List of Pennsylvania state parks for featured list removal here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets the featured list criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks; editors may declare to "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. The Rambling Man (talk) 14:57, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Thank you for the comprehensive and helpful advice you gave at Wikipedia:Peer review/Chikaraishi/archive1. I'll address the issues you raised straight away. Yunshui 雲水 09:04, 21 May 2012 (UTC) |
Good news! You are approved for access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research.
Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasi t | c 22:01, 21 May 2012 (UTC)
Per your request I am advising you that this article has now been nominated at FAC. Perhaps you would (again) pass judgement on the images, and perhaps add any general comment you think necessary. Many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 22:46, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for your comments at the peer review. I think I've addressed them all, apart from more images, which I will add soon. Could you have another look at the reshuffled lead? Also, could you explain what the problem is with the circular redirect? Because I don't see what the issue is. Thanks again. Gran2 00:22, 28 May 2012 (UTC)
So on the off-chance you'd be interested and have the time, I put your name forward. It's not official, so you don't have to turn it down or anything like that. See [2] Smallbones (talk) 03:55, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Hello. I hope all is well. Wikipedia:Peer review/Philip Humber/archive1 closed without a review. Can you reopen it?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 14:48, 29 May 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, I just don't have the time. The interest has really waned, too. I've covered what I wanted to cover, I guess. Gerry D (talk) 02:03, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Thanks very much for doing a peer review on Afroyim v. Rusk. A few comments:
BTW, I've been in contact with Beys Afroyim's son, and I've got a bunch more source material which I'm going to sift through to see if anything more can be added to the article before I'm done with it and ready to nominate it for FA. I'll definitely let you know when this article comes up for FAC. I do wonder if, when that happens, I'm going to end up with as spirited a fight as I did at the Wong Kim Ark FAC's. :-) Thanks again for your feedback here. — Richwales 05:55, 5 June 2012 (UTC)
featured kindness | |
Thank you for combining the participation in featured content, such as Ernest Shackleton and Fanny Imlay, with your approach "never omit... an opportunity of doing a kindness, or speaking a true word, or making a friend", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:54, 6 June 2012 (UTC) |
Finished with your comments. Thanks again! Niagara Don't give up the ship 01:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
If you can spare a moment, I have just uploaded File:CosimaWagnerCaricature.jpg. Disappointingly, the picture is blighted by a moiré pattern that wasn't evident on the image that I scanned. I don't mind the background shading, but the way it imposes on the dress is a problem. Is it possible to clean this up? I'm nott happy using the image as it stands. Brianboulton (talk) 23:09, 7 June 2012 (UTC)
Thanks for your peer review of Part of Me (Katy Perry song) I really appreciate it because I've been waiting forever for one, I'm still doing your suggestions on improving the article and so far, I feel its come a long way. I've requested a copy-edit a while ago also because i eventually want to go for and FA but the peer-review has really helped in the process thanks so much, teman13 TALKCONTRIBUTIONS
Hi, Ruhrfisch. There are two peer reviews for List of Fairy Tail characters going on here and here. I thought I would like to make you aware of this matter per Goodraise's suggestion on my talk page. With that said, is it possible if we can merge these two peer reviews into one? Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 22:36, 8 June 2012 (UTC)
You an administrator who is listed at WP:DYK as willing to help, so I wanted to call your attention to a particularly timely hook for the next queue Wikipedia_talk:Did_you_know#Possible_Queue_6_late_substitution_or_addition. You may want to make a late addition or substitution since the Tony Awards are tonight.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:10, 10 June 2012 (UTC)
I implemented most of the recommendations of your peer review, and renamed the article accordingly to Implications of extraterrestrial contact. However, I did not add a popular culture section as this article is about the scientific study of the subject. I await your response. Wer900 • talk • coordinationconsensus defined 21:35, 16 June 2012 (UTC)
...well, not quite, but it's coming on. I don't think there are any issues with image licencing this time, but I'd welcome any suggestions you might have as to how these might be improved or perked up, if you have a moment. I haven't sent the article to peer review yet, as I'm still busy around the edges. Brianboulton (talk) 21:32, 17 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch! About a week ago, you said you would peer review Grey's Anatomy. I'm just writing to confirm that you still plan on getting to it. Sorry if I sound impatient—it's just that I've been awaiting a peer review for a while, and have been looking forward to it. TRLIJC19 (talk) 01:40, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
On the peer review, you mentioned that the article needs a copy edit. However, it has already been copy edited by a member of the GOCE, just last week. Are you saying that it needs another one? TRLIJC19 (talk) 04:38, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
I have a few more questions—if you don't mind:
Hope to hear back from you! TRLIJC19 (talk) 06:01, 20 June 2012 (UTC)
TFA tomorrow (23 June). I had better check out the prose; it's a while since I looked at this. Brianboulton (talk) 14:20, 22 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi. Do you have time to do an FAC review? It is a fascinating topic, and will be worth your time: Smith Act trials of Communist Party leaders. The FAC is here. This is an unusual situation: there are four Supports and one Oppose by a new-ish editor. I'd appreciate an independent assessment. I'm prepared to make any and all improvements necessary. Cheers. --Noleander (talk) 04:00, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/William the Conqueror/archive1 Ealdgyth - Talk 23:16, 23 June 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch, I thought you might be interested in taking a look at Hemingway's Big Two-Hearted River - fishing and rivers! - that I've nominated at FAC. In the least I'd very much appreciate an image review as you're familiar with images from the JFK Library. Thanks. Truthkeeper (talk) 19:53, 25 June 2012 (UTC)
I am trying to recall the exact closure details. After 30 days, does the bot close discussions on the second day of inactivity or after the second day (on the third day)?--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:35, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
I have just updated the backlog for 22 June. Would you mind updating it for the next few days, as I am currently a little indisposed and only online intermittently. Hope to be back in proper harness soon. Brianboulton (talk) 23:56, 26 June 2012 (UTC)
Dear Ruhrfisch, as someone who twice reviewed the Boeing 767 article, you might be interested in commenting on the FAC of the sibling article Boeing 757, which shares references and structure. Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 00:40, 28 June 2012 (UTC)
Hello. There is an FAC for Ra.One which can be accessed here. I'd be really happy if you could carry out an assessment and give your feeling about the readiness for FA (i.e. Support/Oppose/Leaning either of those two). Thanks and cheers :). ~*~AnkitBhatt~*~ 16:50, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
I was wondering if you could peer review Awake (TV series) at Wikipedia:Peer review/Awake (TV series)/archive3, as I'd like to see it at FA soon. Thank you so much! Cheers! TBrandley 19:52, 5 July 2012 (UTC)
I have nominated Cosima Wagner at FAC, and any comments you care to make will be most welcome there. Brianboulton (talk) 13:35, 6 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi again, Ruhrfisch. I have been desperately trying to look for a copyeditor for Grey's Anatomy that has had a FA, but most I find are unavailable. Do you have any recommendations of a great copyeditor? Thanks, TRLIJC19 (talk) 05:41, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Given that you reviewed the article the first time a few months back, I was wondering if you could have another look at it (Wikipedia:Peer review/Arsène Wenger/archive2) as I feel it is quite close to FAC. If not, apologies for wasting your time. Lemonade51 (talk) 15:13, 9 July 2012 (UTC)
Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:
It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.
At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).
Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.
If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi t | c 17:30, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
Hi Ruhrfisch, I've seen that you're pretty active at peer review, but I don't think we've ever crossed paths before. I currently have Marshall Applewhite up for peer review. I'm looking for an experienced reviewer, and I'd love it if you could take a look. I hope to take it to FAC later this month. It's a bit long, but any comments are welcome. Feel free to take your time. Thanks! Mark Arsten (talk) 18:24, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Ganoga Lake know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on July 18, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 18, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Ganoga Lake is a natural lake in Colley Township in southeast Sullivan County in Pennsylvania, United States. For most of the 19th century, the lake was purchased by the Ricketts family in the early 1850s and became part of R. Bruce Ricketts' extensive holdings in the area after the American Civil War. The Ricketts built a stone house on the lake shore by 1852 or 1855; this served as a hunting lodge and tavern. In 1873 a large wooden addition was built north of the stone house, which became a hotel known as the North Mountain House. The hotel had one of the first summer schools in the United States in 1876 and 1877. After the death of R. Bruce Ricketts in 1918, his heirs sold much of his 80,000 acres (32,000 ha) to the state for Pennsylvania State Game Lands and Ricketts Glen State Park. When the lake was sold in 1957, the state tried to purchase it but was outbid by a group of investors who turned the land around it into a private housing development. Ganoga Lake is on the Allegheny Plateau, just north of the Allegheny Front, in sedimentary rocks from the Pocono Formation. The Wisconsin Glaciation some 20,000 years ago changed the drainage patterns of the lake, this diverted its waters to Kitchen Creek and carved the 24 named waterfalls in Ricketts Glen State Park in the process. (more...)
UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 16 July 2012 (UTC)
Thanks everyone. The lake is long and narrow and I like how the fog helps show that depth / length. I like how ICE: 1) doesn't have the size limits Autostitch does; 2) has the autocrop feature; and 3) can stitch things Autostitch can't. I do like how Autostitch blends images of differnt exposures together better than ICE. Latley when I make a panorama I try both. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:30, 21 July 2012 (UTC)
I'm glad I waited for this, since you have gotten another excellent FA onto the Main Page (And it is, I think, the first lake we've had on the Main Page in ... longer than I can remember. Good job!). Daniel Case (talk) 02:56, 18 July 2012 (UTC)
Hello again. You told me to let you know if I had worked on DVT and was ready for another peer review. If you get a chance your comments would be appreciated. I put the article up a peer review. Thanks. Biosthmors (talk) 01:22, 25 July 2012 (UTC)
Could you comment at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject National_Register of Historic Places#use of upload-assisting pic in NRHP lists?
This is regarding a key part of the upcoming WLM-US photo contest. Smallbones (talk) 12:24, 7 August 2012 (UTC)
I'm not sure how active you are at the moment, but maybe I could ask for your help on a couple of issues:-
Please see the discussion at Template talk:NRHP row#Edit war
Smallbones (talk) 22:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
A little over a year ago, you reviewed this article when it was at PR, and asked me to let you know when it was at FAC. In a quite appalling display of procrastination, distraction and general inactivity, only now have I submitted it there. But anyway, its up. Given the length of time since you went through the article, I completely understand if you no longer have the time/inclination/interest, but if you do, then any comments would be appreciated. Oldelpaso (talk) 18:44, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
Please see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_National_Register_of_Historic_Places#WLM_Android_App_from_WMF
I'll send an e-mail tomorrow about something different.
Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:29, 30 August 2012 (UTC)
Hey.... Thanks for peer review of Ayurveda article. This is very important article and your peer review is really helpful and I have made certain changes as per your review. Thanks. Abhijeet Safai (talk) 12:19, 30 August 2012 (UTC)