User talk:Phlsph7: Difference between revisions
Active2023 (talk | contribs) →Logic article changes: new section |
|||
Line 75: | Line 75: | ||
::Well yes, if you're not familiar with it, I can nominate it for you. Unless someone else beats me to it, that is. Lol. [[User:BorgQueen|BorgQueen]] ([[User talk:BorgQueen|talk]]) 09:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
::Well yes, if you're not familiar with it, I can nominate it for you. Unless someone else beats me to it, that is. Lol. [[User:BorgQueen|BorgQueen]] ([[User talk:BorgQueen|talk]]) 09:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
:::Great, I would get back to you once the process is complete so we can figure something out. Judging from my other GA nominations, it may take a while though. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7#top|talk]]) 09:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
:::Great, I would get back to you once the process is complete so we can figure something out. Judging from my other GA nominations, it may take a while though. [[User:Phlsph7|Phlsph7]] ([[User talk:Phlsph7#top|talk]]) 09:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC) |
||
== Logic article changes == |
|||
Hello, Phlsph7! I've considered your reversion of an edit done by myself, done in [[Logic]], however, there really aren't much sources to this concept and the reason of such edit was for readers to start conceiving this idea. Greetings! [[User:Active2023|Active2023]] ([[User talk:Active2023|talk]]) 01:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC) |
Revision as of 01:30, 9 January 2023
Archives (Index) |
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
I have sent you a note about a page you started
U have sent I a note about a page I started
(Dsvwl) Hello, Phlsph7. Thank you for your work on Schramm's model of communication. User:SunDawn, while examining this page as a part of our page curation process, had the following comments:
Thanks for creating the article!
To reply, leave a comment here and begin it with {{Re|SunDawn}}
. Please remember to sign your reply with ~~~~
. (Message delivered via the Page Curation tool, on behalf of the reviewer.)
✠ SunDawn ✠ (contact) 14:27, 26 October 2022 (UTC)
In appreciation
The Reviewers Award | ||
By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this award in recognition of the thorough, detailed and actionable reviews you have carried out at FAC. This work is very much appreciated. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:30, 23 November 2022 (UTC) |
- Thanks a lot for the feedback on my reviews! Phlsph7 (talk) 08:43, 24 November 2022 (UTC)
- I'd like to second the views of Gog the Mild after you did an excellently comprehensive GA review of one of my efforts. Your work improved the article enormously and I really appreciate your efforts. Well done. BcJvs | talk UTC 14:50, 26 November 2022 (UTC)
ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 12 December 2022. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.
The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.
If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}}
to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:49, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Question...
What is "the GAN"? — Jacona (talk) 18:24, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Jacona. Sorry, maybe I should have added a wikilink. GAN refers to Good article nominations. The article Purdue University is currently listed as good article nominee, as shown on its talk page. One requirement for successful nominations is that the article is well-sourced, which, unfortunately, it is not. Phlsph7 (talk) 18:47, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for satisfying my curiosity! — Jacona (talk) 19:19, 29 November 2022 (UTC)
Hi Phlsph7. You've added multiple short form reference ls to this article, without defining what those works are. For instance you've added "Håkansson & Westander 2013" but you need to add a full cite to explain what work that is referring to. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 17:51, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi ActivelyDisinterested and thanks for letting me know. I've added the sources in my last edit. There are still various reference errors so it will take me a little longer to sort them out. Phlsph7 (talk) 17:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
- Much thanks. -- LCU ActivelyDisinterested ∆transmissions∆ °co-ords° 17:58, 20 December 2022 (UTC)
Huntsville, Alabama GAN
Hi, again, thank you for your original review of the GAN for Huntsville, Alabama. I've rewritten a lot of the article and changed the things you suggested, and have renominated in. Would you mind reviewing it again? Thank you! --MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 14:40, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Hi MyCatIsAChonk and thanks for all the changes following the last nomination. All the "citation needed" tags have been addressed and the unreliable sources were removed. I just spotted a few minor claims that still lack sources:
Major stations include WHNT 19.1 CBS, WHIQ 25.1 PBS/Alabama Public Television, WAFF 48.1 NBC, and WZDX 54.1 FOX.
The airport is a general aviation airport and does not have any regularly-scheduled commercial services.
The former chief of police was appointed as its director.
These organizations are located in Huntsville but operate both in the city and outside with HCRU responding to many cave rescue calls coming from caves well outside the city limits.
- Another thing that caught my eye is that the article has many subsections, which makes the contents overview really long. You could use "
{{TOC limit|3}}
" to exclude the subsubsection from the overview. - From what I can tell, all the other points from the last review have also been addressed. It looks much better now. It's probably better if someone else does the second review. Good luck with the GAN! Phlsph7 (talk) 16:26, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
- Thanks for your help again! —MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2022 (UTC) MyCatIsAChonk (talk) 16:35, 24 December 2022 (UTC)
Communication
Nice work! Such vital-topic articles deserve it. After it passes the GA hurdle (shouldn't be too difficult) please consider nominating it for DYK for some Main Page exposure. BorgQueen (talk) 09:01, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- @BorgQueen: Thanks for the feedback! The DYK nomination afterwards sounds like a good idea. Do you have some experience concerning the DYK process? Phlsph7 (talk) 09:08, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well yes, if you're not familiar with it, I can nominate it for you. Unless someone else beats me to it, that is. Lol. BorgQueen (talk) 09:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Great, I would get back to you once the process is complete so we can figure something out. Judging from my other GA nominations, it may take a while though. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:18, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
- Well yes, if you're not familiar with it, I can nominate it for you. Unless someone else beats me to it, that is. Lol. BorgQueen (talk) 09:11, 7 January 2023 (UTC)
Logic article changes
Hello, Phlsph7! I've considered your reversion of an edit done by myself, done in Logic, however, there really aren't much sources to this concept and the reason of such edit was for readers to start conceiving this idea. Greetings! Active2023 (talk) 01:30, 9 January 2023 (UTC)