Fram
- /Archive 1: August 2005 - June 2006
- /Archive 2: July 2006 - November 2006
Picture placement
Hi Fram, thank you for moving the pictures in the city articles. I didn't realize that these pictures were actually superimposed on the table of contents (my browser shows them one beside the other). I'll check to see if any more of those might occur... Should we have any concern about text being sandwiched between two pictures facing each other? LVan 15:26, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- No problem. As for text between two pictures: normally this is to be avoided, but certainly with lengthy infoboxes and shorter articles it is sometimes hard not to get this effect. I have not corrected Ostend yet because I couldn't work out a good layout for all the pictures (perhaps and indication that we have too many pictures there?). Fram 16:11, 3 December 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks for your comment on the Mechelen talk page. Would you care to verify Bruges 2006-12-06T22:27:53 version, whether the contents box appears still superimposed by the photograph in your browser? (I had modified that page before I realized the true nature of the problem, and possibly those edits solved it – though I doubt it). You may let me know or, if no-one moved the photograph by then in the current version, of course move it immediately. I assume it would in that bad case best be put between titles ==History== and ===Golden Age (12th to 15th century)=== (I can't find it right now, but I once read it is best not to put an [[Image|...]] immediately underneath the title of the section in which the image is to be shown beside the first paragraph, but rather on top of the section title [showing not just the text but also that title to the side of the image]), which you might then also verify in your browser. Finally, I wonder whether another syntax used in the Mechelen 2006-12-07T00:37:54 version causes a serious problem for your browser. There as well, its current version may then require moving the photograph out of the intro. Kind regards. — SomeHuman 8 Dec2006 23:42 (UTC)
Deletion of Holden Street, Fitzroy North, Melbourne
I plan to expand this article significntly, please don't delete this article. I find that this is a very noticible street of Fitzroy North. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Adammw (talk • contribs) 23:11, 7 December 2006 (UTC). Why have you deleted my article? What is the point of Wikipedia haveing users being able to write their own articles if they just get deleted because someone thinks it's "not notabile". What does that matter!?! What if someone wanted to view the article for research or something! its not like it takes much space on the wikipedia servers! Anyway, I think it is notabile! Bert Newton grew up on this street, there is a huge park beside it, part of a bus route, tram interchange, a big petrol station, a big school, and is very inner-city! Look, i don't know if it would be possible to get it back, but I truly think it should not have been deleted. Until now, i have had very limited internet access about 1 hour every 2 months! How was I supposed to do anything without warning! Adammw 13:55, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Watermelon (color)
I don't understand this deletion process. My article Watermelon (color) is so obscure and uncontroversial that it seems unlikely that anyone but myself and you would be interested in commenting on it. Keraunos 07:48, 10 December 2006 (UTC)
Article in need of cleanup - please assist if you can
|
The article Antwerp, to which you have helped contribute, has been flagged as requiring cleanup. If possible, we would appreciate your assistance in cleaning up this article to bring it up to Wikipedia's quality standards. If you are unsure what the nature of the problem is, please discuss this on the article's talk page. |
Ido and Novial compared
This is a wiki. Articles tend to be built up over a period of time (that page is less than 24 hours old). I remember looking at the English Wikipedia back in 2002 when much of it could fairly have been described as crap. Has the Wikipedia patience worn out now that it has grown big? The article already contains parallel texts which provide some comparison - which is what the article is for. The idea is to expand it over time. Nov ialiste 17:13, 15 December 2006 (UTC)
Fountainview Academy, Lillooet
Hi; saw your merge/edit, just wondering if that section shouldn't just be headed Fountainview Academy rather than "Education". If it's titled "Education" that section should have entries on Lillooet's public schools and also on the Upper St'at'imc language and education authority, and I think there's an O.K. College "campus" in the guise of night school classes at Lillooet Sec. It's not as if the Seventh Days were the only educational system Lillooet has, after all.Skookum1 18:41, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
- Of course, the idea was that other schools wuld be included in the same section. I only added the Fountainview academy because that one had received its own article, while I thought it would be better to have the main info in the Lillooet article. It's not meant as an indication that this school is more notable or important than any other school there. But if you would prefer to rename the section until more schools are added, then I have no problem with that. Fram 20:40, 19 December 2006 (UTC)
proposed deletion of Bicycle aerodynamics and power
I have removed the {{prod}} tag from Bicycle aerodynamics and power, which you proposed for deletion, because I feel that this article should not be deleted from Wikipedia. I'm leaving this message here to notify you about it. If you still feel the article should be deleted, please don't add the {{prod}} template back to the article. Instead, feel free to list it at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion. Thanks! -- Chrislk02 (Chris Kreider) 16:17, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
- Hi Fram, where can I find a copy of the Road bicycle tire wear article that you deleted? Kerry Irons' other bicycle physics articles are good expositions and, while they need integration work, they are valuable contributions. I'd like to check the tire wear article to see if it is similarly informative. -- pde 22:53, 1 February 2007 (UTC)
- Per Wikipedia:Undeletion policy, you can ask any admin to do so, or post it at WP:DRV. Note that I (or anyone else) may still put it up for deletion at WP:AfD. I'm n ot an admin, so I can't undo the deletion myself. Fram 05:58, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Spirou opinion
Hi Fram, could you pop by Spirou et Fantasio and weigh in on a difference of opinion between User:Andromeda and myself concerning.. well, maybe WP policy.. MURGH disc. 10:31, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Regarding Tintin Books
Since you have updated the infoboxes but have left few of them unchanged, I tried to update them. I was unable to track down a source which could give me ISBN nos, publishing dates, etc. It will be helpful if you give me the link so that we both can update them fast. 54UV1K 16:32, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
Pages by day
Hm, good question. I don't see the need to be overly bureaucratic about this. I think the best way of dealing with it is nominating three or four of them for deletion in a single nom (making clear that they're unmaintained and redundant, and as you say WP:NOT) and stipulating that if they get deleted, all the others go as well. Deleting a few hundred pages is quite fast with a tabbed browser, creating a few hundred AFD pages is just pointless drudgework and not necessary. >Radiant< 16:52, 3 January 2007 (UTC)
- I didn't expect so many procedural objections. Maybe WP:CENT is better. But let's leave the AFD for a day or two and see who else responds. >Radiant< 13:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, thanks for the support. I'll wait to see what other reactions I'll get, perhaps there will be at least a consensus as to where I should discuss this :-) I'm gald that at least it hasn't been shot down as a disgrace or something... Fram 13:14, 4 January 2007 (UTC)
Thoughts
If you can hold up going to cent a few days, I'll try and work up a list of what could be salvaged and what could be deleted and go from there. Some of this stuff is useful to the current events portal, so it's a case of working it all out. Steve block Talk 17:08, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, I'll wait a bit. It's all a bit of a mess anyway, and there's no rush. Let me know what you want me to do and when you want it! Fram 20:39, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
Funny
Come on, atleast admit my edit made you laugh :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 58.107.175.127 (talk)
- I don't think vandalazing articles by adding insults is funny at all. Fram 10:02, 5 January 2007 (UTC)
- I guess its all up to interpretation. You must have had a tough life mentally if you couldnt even rouse a tiny little bit of comedy from my edit :) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.107.175.127 (talk) 10:22, 5 January 2007 (UTC).
A suggested move
Hi Fram, if you could share your experience on such issues: I thought to make connections between Greg as in Michel Regnier to Greg, and found the natural redirect namespace Greg (comics) occupied by a Marvel character article that may or may not not have the right of life. I could of course leave everything alone, but am tempted to try some fix. It seems an uncomplicated move, but there might be aspects I don't quite foresee.. How would you suggest to proceed? MURGH disc. 18:17, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- I have seen your move request on the talk page, and have added my support and reasons. Good call! Fram 21:05, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks. Well explained there, I am now totally convinced. MURGH disc. 21:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)
- Sorry, it's my first time in this particular situ, and just to check. Having moved the previous occupant onto Greg (Marvel Comics), I thought to establish something instead of the redirect at the old namespace, but maybe that's a bad idea? For the MR article to move on, is this an admin exclusive action or is it open for me to proceed?—MURGH disc. 17:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- I think that's an administrative action, since you want to move an article (Michel Regnier) to a page that already has a history. It's best to list it on WP:RFM I presume, with explanation of the need for admin action. When that's done, can you handle the redirects created or do you want some help? Fram 20:30, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- OK, thx. I'll proceed with an RfM, but I'm not crystal clear about the consequences. The redirect that will exist after this move (Michel Regnier -> Greg (comics)) is a good redirect, yes, so shouldn't that just be left alone? Apologies if I seem dense about this. I'd certainly prefer not to be helpless ;) —MURGH disc. 22:27, 25 January 2007 (UTC)
- You're not dense, I didn't make myself clear enough. The redirect is a good one, but all articles that currently link to Michel Regnier have to be linked to Greg (comics) instead. This are about 50 articles. Fram 06:01, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
- Good of you to say :). I'd be happy to handle those when the move is done. —MURGH disc. 14:38, 26 January 2007 (UTC)
vandalism??
Wait, how did I vandalise the ww2 talk page??? Jeez I was asking who that idiot was that kept typing ownzor on the page! —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 58.107.175.127 (talk) 10:24, 13 January 2007 (UTC).
- Calling someone "poofter" (and to a lesser degree "nerd") is a personal attack, which is a form of unacceptable vandalism as well. Fram 19:10, 13 January 2007 (UTC)
Hi, I've added three sources to this article. [1] I believe this should take care of the sourcing and notability concerns, and you may want to revisit your AfD comments. Best regards, Dragonfiend 06:41, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
- I've reproduced the coverage in full, you may want to have another visit and see for yourself if the meet notability concerns. Steve block Talk 14:56, 18 January 2007 (UTC)
Newyorkbrad's RfA
Thank you for your support on my RfA, which closed favorably this morning, as well as for your kind comments accompanying your !vote. I appreciate the confidence the community has placed in me and am looking forward to my new responsibilities. Please let me know if ever you have any comments or suggestions, especially as I am learning how to use the tools. Best regards, Newyorkbrad 20:30, 21 January 2007 (UTC)
Ome Henk Merge
Thanx. — RevRagnarok Talk Contrib 18:17, 22 January 2007 (UTC)
About I.O. Godfroid
Hi Fram ! I must admit you're right about the "psychiagenia" concept. This was too new to be included in Wiki. All the best from the celtic world ! --Siabraid 09:54, 24 January 2007 (UTC)
4DL
Actually, I do agree on deleting the article now that I took the time to look back at it. There's not a lot of information on it and it doesn't seem "important."
By the way, thanks for welcoming me! --ToKnow 01:59, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
Weird bot actions
Is that STTWbot following someone's thought-out plan or off on an intuitive spree marking all things Franco and Frenchish? I followed your suit with the ones on my watchlist (except for those with a strong French alibi) but could this keep happening over and over? Should someone be asked, or just leave it do you think? —MURGH disc. 20:27, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- I suppose all articles in the category Franco-Belgian comics are, if you follow the tree, also linked to some pure French category (understandably perhaps), and that this bot goes through these categories top-to-bottom and adds the Wikiproject tag to all those articles. If it doesn't happen again, I wouldn't mention it and just remove the tag (except the good ones of course, e.g. Glénat is a French publisher). If it does happen again, we will have to contact the owner of the bot and ask to change that behaviour. Fram 20:31, 27 January 2007 (UTC)
- It came back, if you hadn't seen yet. Seems a number of people have a similar reaction on User_talk:SlaveToTheWage#WikiProject_France_tags, so I'll try leaving a note there and maybe the bot can do the reverting instead of doing all that again.. :( MURGH disc. 05:42, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
- No, I hadn't seen it yet. Thanks for taking action, let's hope he modifies the bot (he has had similar complaints from other country projects as well). Fram 08:02, 9 February 2007 (UTC)
Email me
Send me an email. CyberAnth 11:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- No. Say what you have to say on Wikipedia. Fram 12:38, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
Thank you, Fram, for giving me some of your time. As you can see, it hasn't been all puppies and rainbows before this. I haven't been one to engage in namecalling, though, and I was surprised and upset to see things escalating like that. I appreciate your assurance that I was not just "seeing things"; I was beginning to wonder if it was just a given that editors should expect and ignore clever insults. It occurs to me in retrospect that "ANI or RFC" wasn't a spot-on suggestion; I should have just gone to RFC instead, as this wasn't quite "administrator intervention" material. I was a bit distracted. Anyway, you didn't have to read all that and respond; it was good of you to do so, without assuming that either party was in the wrong over the long term. Be well, — coelacan talk — 16:59, 2 February 2007 (UTC)
- Wow, he plays passive victim almost as well as the other extreme. CyberAnth 20:56, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
- If you can't be bothered to reply to questions or to document your accusations, then please refrain from making any more comments on my userpage. Fram 21:10, 3 February 2007 (UTC)
I've been tidying up the ratings section in line with other projects, and rating those articles for which one was requested. With this article, I've nominally rating it as a B-Class, but I think it may well be A-Class. I'd appreciate your view of it at Talk:Off*beat/Comments. Steve block Talk 14:51, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
You don't fancy adding the peer review page to your watch list, do you? You have a good eye for articles and your input would be welcomed there, if it establishes itself as a process. Steve block Talk 19:16, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for the compliment ;-). I'll add it to the watchlist and try to give some input, but I'm slightly flooded in Wikipedia- and non-Wikipedia-work for the moment, so my input may stay limited. And thank you for all the hard work for the comicsproject, it's really doing great (apart from the collaboration of "the month", that is...). 21:36, 7 February 2007 (UTC)
Request from Ryan Keyes
Hello Fram,
I put a link to one of my pages to be deleted on your proposed deletions page. Click Here to see the entry.
Thank you,
Mop
Hi Fram,
would you like to become an admin? I'd be happy to write a WP:RFA nomination statement for you if you want; please tell me if there is anything in your contributions that I should pay particular attention to (couldn't see anything bad and some good stuff in 20 minutes of browsing through them). Happy editing, Kusma (討論) 13:58, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Hi Kusma, thank you very much for the offer. Is it allright if I think about it for a day? It's attractive, to be able to help with some of the backlogs (CSD and so on), but I don't have time to spare as it is already (but then again, probably most admins don't). As for my contributions: I have not turned any articles into FA or GA (I have contributed to The Adventures of Tintin, but that was only minor compared to the complete article). On the other hand, the articles I do create are all referenced and tend to be more than a stub (see e.g. Frank Pé, Luc Cromheecke or the fairly decent article Raoul Cauvin, and the non-comic article Phillip Margolin). I have also created the Portal:Belgium and am currently working on a section for the Portal:Comics. This will cause a huge number of portal edits in my editcount, but I think I have a decent number of edits in other domains. The rest of my work is mostly vandal fighting, XfD work, and random work (improving random articles). As for conflicts and so on: I have had a few, one with a group of editors responsible for Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Eiland and related islands, one with an editor over some aspects of The Smurfs (see the talk page for more details), and one with [user:whjohnson]] over an article he created and recreated. I haven't had any major conflicts in the last few months though. Possible other objections people may have are my language mistakes (both spelling errors and misuse of the English language), and being seen as a deletionist. Perhaps some minor incivility, but I don't think anything major ever happened (certainly no warnings for this or any other blockable offense).
- Anyway, I'll come back to you on this tomorrow, and I'm certainly flattered by the proposal (yes, it's no big deal, but it still is a form of recognition). Fram 14:47, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Take your time :-) If you do accept, it will take me a couple days until I'm happy with the nomination statement anyway. Best, Kusma (討論) 14:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
- Having slept on it, I have decided to accept. I think I can do useful things (helping out with CSD and XfD closures, AIV, and checking other backlogs) if I would get the mop. If I don't get it, at least I'll know where I go wrong according to some/most editors, and I can always continue editing. If your nomination is ready on Friday or in the weekend, I'll probably only accept it on Monday, as I'm not so often online in the weekend and wouldn't be able to swiftly reply to any additional questions asked. As for possible objections people may have: I have virtually no experience with images. I don't plan to do any admin actions on images either (at least until I do have some more experience), but still I have seen people object for this reason, so it may be better if you know this up front. Fram 13:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Okay, great :-) I'll write up something soon then. Don't worry too much about opposition reasons like images (I had five image edits at the time of my RFA and passed unanimously, and still don't feel comfortable about non-obvious image deletions) - there is no need to have experience in every area, you should have experience in sufficiently many areas to pass. Kusma (討論) 14:26, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Having slept on it, I have decided to accept. I think I can do useful things (helping out with CSD and XfD closures, AIV, and checking other backlogs) if I would get the mop. If I don't get it, at least I'll know where I go wrong according to some/most editors, and I can always continue editing. If your nomination is ready on Friday or in the weekend, I'll probably only accept it on Monday, as I'm not so often online in the weekend and wouldn't be able to swiftly reply to any additional questions asked. As for possible objections people may have: I have virtually no experience with images. I don't plan to do any admin actions on images either (at least until I do have some more experience), but still I have seen people object for this reason, so it may be better if you know this up front. Fram 13:48, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
- Take your time :-) If you do accept, it will take me a couple days until I'm happy with the nomination statement anyway. Best, Kusma (討論) 14:55, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
There you go (see here for instructions; don't forget to update the ending time to seven days after you transclude the nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship):
Good luck! Kusma (討論) 19:31, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
King Features
I've put a lot of work into that King Features Syndicate page. I'm not unwilling to write about DailyINK; it's just more work. I think DailyINK is an important step in the evolution of the comic strip, especially with their concept of making classic comic strips return on a daily basis. Thus, it deserves much more space than the single sentence I had written previously. Excerpting from the press release to present more facts was a quick fix. But why am I the only person writing about this if it is so important? And why would someone delete all that new information without replacing it with the same info in the proper encyclopedic form? When is someone going to join me in creating a proper history of King Features? Pepso 23:02, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
- I know the feeling of being the only one who seems interested in a subject :-) I will in the near future not collaborate on the King Features article, but I'm working on related articles as well (I just wrote an article on the very early popular King Features comic Happy Hooligan, which didn't have an article at all!). But it is better to not have any information or only a sentence than to have copyrighted or POV info, as those are core principles of Wikipedia (free content and WP:NPOV). I appreciate the work you put into the article and I understand why you added the info from the press release, but if you don't have the time right now to rewrite it in your own words, then leave it please until you or someone else does. Fram 19:08, 17 February 2007 (UTC)
Upcoming anniversary
I was close to try to add to Portal:Comics/Anniversaries/February/February 28 this upcoming event [2][3], but I thought maybe as the authority on this you could add it according to style.. It does qualify, yes? MURGH disc. 13:13, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- It does qualify, but I prefer to only add dates that are already mentioned on Wikipedia. Of course, this simply means that the Gaston Lagaffe article must mention the first appearance of the character (and you have the prefect sources for that). Then a sentence like "1957: first appearance of Gaston Lagaffe, famous Belgian comic by André Franquin" can be added to the portal pages (I'm quite limited in how I write those oneliners, due to lack of space mainly, and because I try to keep them rather neutral ("famous", "important", "influential", and so on are to be used sparingly). But as it is a Wiki, you are of course free to use your imagination! Thanks for asking anyway, I hope to get it on the portal page pretty soon (there are still 16 dates without any entry though, but I haven't finished checking all comics articles either). Fram 13:19, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Cool. I had an Early publications section on GL going that got cut by Thermaland's makeover, who felt it too obsessive. I've been awaiting some consensus feeling about this before going back into that page (because repeated rejection is just too much for me ;) ) but I'll think about how it'd be best slipped in. Good luck with the final stretch of anniversaries —and potential adminship. MURGH disc. 14:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I haven't followed that makeover really, so I can't judge what happened there yet. I don't think anyone can complain if yu add afew sentences indicating both the first and last appearance, as that is normal info (a bit like the dates of birth and death), if it can be sourced (which certainly for the start date shouldn't be any problem). A larger section discussion different aspects of his appearance and format may be overkill, although such things arehard to judge and are more a case of personal preference. As for the adminship: it looks good now, but I will just wait and see! Fram 14:07, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Cool. I had an Early publications section on GL going that got cut by Thermaland's makeover, who felt it too obsessive. I've been awaiting some consensus feeling about this before going back into that page (because repeated rejection is just too much for me ;) ) but I'll think about how it'd be best slipped in. Good luck with the final stretch of anniversaries —and potential adminship. MURGH disc. 14:03, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I did it! Had a go at the anniversary file. Please do let me know what you think about the unorthodox phrasing. ..And the GL article now mentions the big date.. MURGH disc. 22:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- Near perfect. I just italicized Gaston Lagaffe, because it is a character but mainly the name of a series. Thanks! Fram 05:59, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- I did it! Had a go at the anniversary file. Please do let me know what you think about the unorthodox phrasing. ..And the GL article now mentions the big date.. MURGH disc. 22:27, 19 February 2007 (UTC)
- I got encouraged to add a few more (including a virgin entry for April 27) but while flipping to find something missing, I was confronted with a dilemma I found a week ago. There is a birth day conflict with EN, FR and DE:WPs and many other sources of the world [4][5][6] concerning the birth date of Claire Bretécher. Well, I changed the EN:WP entry a week ago because of what felt like compelling evidence and the increasing likelihood that one slip of the finger had led to the WP+derivatives error slide, but I still haven't found the conclusively satisfying proof. Her own site says frustratingly little about it. Do you have any anniversary hunter's trick for getting to the bottom of this? MURGH disc. 21:26, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks for all the help, it's great that it is finally coming together (only 11 or 12 redlinked dates left!). As for the birthdate: Comiclopedia gives only 1940, and I have no better offline sources close by to check further for now. The official site gives no date, so perhaps she prefers to not list it, and then it is better if we don't list it either, certainly when the sources that do give a date seem to disagree. Fram 21:33, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- You have been doing this project for many months? it must be nice to smell a conclusion.
And yes, that is something to consider, that the Bretécher site makes a "no-statement" about it. English Comiclopedia does give 7/4 though.. I'll look at some of her books the next days and see if they ever touch upon it.. MURGH disc. 22:19, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- I've been friskily adding to anniversaries when/if I can spot something not yet covered (not easy), and you haven't given me a vandal warning yet ;) I'd like to think I've caught on to the established style of things, but please let me know if there is something to comment about the way I'm approaching it. Cheers, MURGH disc. 21:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've just slightly rewritten your entry on the Pilote / Charlie merger, but apart from that I'm more than happy with the help (and in the meantime, only 8 dates without entries left!) Fram 21:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes I saw that one needed the improvement, I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking there. So, is it when all dates are filled that this goes public, or have you set some other criteria for the launch? It could, somehow possibly, be that something comics-related hasn't happened on every day of the year, yes? MURGH disc. 21:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I'm almost through the lists of articles I know of that could contain a relevant date, a few more weeks should do the trick at most. Then I put it online, whether complete or with eight holes doesn't really matter. I'll ask at the project and portal pages for other people to add and update the lists then, but I'll try to get it as complete as possible before it goes live. We don't want to many empty sections on the portal page after all... Fram 21:43, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- Yes I saw that one needed the improvement, I'm not sure exactly what I was thinking there. So, is it when all dates are filled that this goes public, or have you set some other criteria for the launch? It could, somehow possibly, be that something comics-related hasn't happened on every day of the year, yes? MURGH disc. 21:40, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've just slightly rewritten your entry on the Pilote / Charlie merger, but apart from that I'm more than happy with the help (and in the meantime, only 8 dates without entries left!) Fram 21:27, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
- I've been friskily adding to anniversaries when/if I can spot something not yet covered (not easy), and you haven't given me a vandal warning yet ;) I'd like to think I've caught on to the established style of things, but please let me know if there is something to comment about the way I'm approaching it. Cheers, MURGH disc. 21:25, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
DYK
|
On 20 February, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Happy Hooligan, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
--ALoan (Talk) 17:00, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
|
|
On February 28, 2007, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Winnie Winkle, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the "Did you know?" talk page. |
Thanks again Fram. And congratulations on your newfound ability to update DYK! Blnguyen (bananabucket) 05:56, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Your RFA
Thank you for answering my questions. I already supported but it seems you'll be able to have the patience I expect in an admin. It seems that your broom has been shipped already. If you need anything, let me know. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, odometer) 22:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
- No problem, they were good questions to check if I understood some policies and guidelines, which is of course necessary in an admin. Thanks for your support and kind offer! Fram 05:56, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
gaston band
Maybe I just don't remember that particular strip. I distinctly remember one (I think it's the 400th) where they discuss with "l'Anglais" about building a band, with various names being discussed.Circeus 16:09, 21 February 2007 (UTC)
- In Gaston No.8 Lagaffe nous gâte, p58, at the party of Gaston's 600th gaffe, the band starts playing -the Gaffophone electrified. On Jules' drum is the text Moon Module. MURGH disc. 00:34, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what I had in mind. Fram 05:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- It was better documented than I thought, and the frame (slightly enhanced from the one in my album?) with the full name is on display at franquin com.[7] I don't see why the band's name couldn't stand a mention in the article's gaffophone section. MURGH disc. 10:38, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks! That's what I had in mind. Fram 05:55, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
Thanks
It's been a week since my recent request for adminship passed, and since I haven't managed to delete the Main Page - yet - I figure it's safe to send these out. Thanks a lot for participating in my RfA; I hope to do a good job. If you see me doing something wrong, need help, or just want to have a chat, please don't hesitate to drop by :) – riana_dzasta 07:15, 22 February 2007 (UTC)
.jpg)
Your RFA currently has a 100% (54/0/0) tally and is scheduled to end any minute now. It looks like you going to become an administrator as soon as a Bureaucrat closes the discussion. Good luck. BuickCenturyDriver (Honk, odometer) 09:20, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- And here he is. After unanimous support, you're now an admin. Spend some time on the administrator's reading list and have fun using the new tools to make this a better place. Don't hesitate to ask questions, and as you get comfortable, dig in and help out with the backlogs. Again, congrats. - Taxman Talk 13:01, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, both of you! Wow, a new bunch of buttons to play with ;-) I'll take it slow at first, and try to get the hang of it with some uncontroversial CSD's in the beginning. I'll post a thank you to all supporters somewhere in the next few days as well, but here's a thank you for the confidence in me to everyone reading this! Fram 13:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations! Good luck with the tools...! The Rambling Man 13:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Yes, all the best, and remember that there are over a thousand of your fellow admins who will be only to happy to lend advice if you're unsure (especially in the early days). Congrats! Neil (not Proto ►) 14:32, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Congratulations! Good luck with the tools...! The Rambling Man 13:28, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks, both of you! Wow, a new bunch of buttons to play with ;-) I'll take it slow at first, and try to get the hang of it with some uncontroversial CSD's in the beginning. I'll post a thank you to all supporters somewhere in the next few days as well, but here's a thank you for the confidence in me to everyone reading this! Fram 13:10, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
- dup. comment.
- Congrats on your succesful RfA, Fram! Have fun mopping. :) - Anas Talk? 14:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Congrats! ConDemTalk 15:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Congrats on your succesful RfA, Fram! Have fun mopping. :) - Anas Talk? 14:37, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
- Proficiaat! Heel veel succes. Angus McLellan (Talk) 15:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)
EAScripting
I just noticed you deleted my page on EAScripting. Care to explain what you you meant by it being a hoax? Comperr 14:30, 4 March 2007 (UTC)
- There is not one googlehit for EAScripting outside of Wikipedia.[8] It is probably the only existing, publicly released since 2005 programming language with that dubious distinction. There is not one shred of evidence (via Google or via the article) that this exists, so that's why I said that it "looks like a hoax, no verifiable sources found". If it isn't a hoax, then it is very, very badly commercialized and publicized... Fram 06:03, 5 March 2007 (UTC)