User talk:HJ Mitchell: Difference between revisions

Archived discussions: up to 11 October, 2009; 14 October to 7 December, 2009

{{Talkback|5 albert square}}

		The Half Barnstar
		For your tireless tag-team work with User:5 albert square on The Bill. hamiltonstone (talk) 02:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why thankyou. For the barnstar and for all your efforts at The Bill. I honestly think there are not many reviewers who would have had the patience you did. HJMitchell You rang? 02:22, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Listen, if you're too busy to get Pitt's article it's understandable. I can ask someone else to do the copy-edit, no worries, really. That way you can go back to with your other tasks, before I came in to "add more" to your life. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 17:11, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No it's fine, honestly. I've got a lot less on my plate now- the GA nom I was working on passed and I've finished my review of one of the articles I was reviewing . Sorry it took me so long but I'll be able to help you out now. I'll start working my way through it this evening and it'll probably take me a day or two. Does that suit you? HJMitchell You rang? 19:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

...Only if this doesn't bother your schedule. If it does, no hard feelings, really. But if it doesn't, then please continue with your work. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 19:33, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not at all, it's nice to do something a little different, it's fine. I've got no plans for the evening anyway so I'll be on it in about 10 minutes (one last thing to check then I'm all yours). HJMitchell You rang? 19:41, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Didn't want to interrupt you. Alright, as long as the article isn't interfering with your other work, then please continue. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 22:04, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's fine. I'm working on it now. Bit of a gap since my mother phoned me (joy of joys) but I'm on it now. While you're here I have one or two points:

• When you talk about his early jobs in LA, can you find a better way of phrasing it than "ranging from chauffeur to dressing up as a chicken for El Polo Loco"?
• Do you have a date (or just a month) for his role in Growing Pains?
• can you be more specific than "moved to the adriatic" (which is a sea- a country or "the Balkans"/ "south east Europe"?

Drop me a line if you want to query anything I've done so far! HJMitchell You rang? 22:38, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Originally, the sentence read like this ---> "While struggling in Los Angeles, he took a variety of occasional jobs, ranging from chauffeuring,[10] being a delivery man,[6] and dressing up as an El Pollo Loco chicken, to pay for his acting classes", see here. But, the "being a delivery man" was removed. Growing Pains appearance (first one) was in November 1987, (second appearance) was in February 1989. The last one IDK, really. Your doing good, keep it up. ;) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:01, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, I might see if I can tweak that. I'll look at ading the date for his fisrst appearance in, too. The rest (IMO at least) aren't really crucial, it's just context. HJMitchell You rang? 23:25, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Be my guest [on both]. I trust you to make them both read good. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:42, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do my best. HJMitchell You rang? 23:52, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know you will. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 23:53, 7 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I just looked at the Fight Club article, and it doesn't really say when the DVD was released. I did a Google search, it looks like it might have been in 2000, so, [1]. Wait, what box office performance? Are you talking about Fight Club's box office? I'm gonna be honest with you, I'm not good at paraphrasing, so. Well, if you can, please help in anyway you can. --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 20:38, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd suggest you add that in then- just for a little context. Oh, yeah, Fight Club's box office performance- I just chopped and changed bits of the sentence round and can't remember if there was a ref attached to it that I might have misplaced? I gathered as much from reading the comments at the FAC- I've done one or two of the quotes that I could do quickly, I'll take another look later on. I'll see what I can do. Any problems with what I've done so far? HJMitchell You rang? 21:12, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Has been added. There was a ref. there. Alright, if you can do that, I applaud you, cause I can't. I've tried doing it, but it's just too hard... damn too hard. Two things, please be careful with the comma settings, (I had to fix it in the Critical success and 1999-2003 section), also please be careful with overlinking, you linked Julia Roberts in the Ocean's 11 part, even though her name is already linked in The Mexican sentence (same section, same paragraph). Overall, you're doing great. :) --  ThinkBlue  (Hit BLUE) 21:24, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey another Brit, while Viriditas and Drolz is having their little nerd war could you check out my new article, Black Week (Hawaii). —Hawaii Samurai (talk) 06:14, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yep, there's a few of us on here though most of the people I meet are from t'other side of the Atlantic. What gave it away? Anyway, your article, it looks fine to me- though it'd benefit from a few dates in the prose (not just the infobox). If you need any help round here, just drop me a line! Oh, and keep up the good work! HJMitchell You rang? 12:45, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I took long to respond, the bio of your article says you are and British-English speaker. Actually, I am a poi dog (you can probably determine the other ethnicity by my screen name) If it is not much trouble I would like our opinion of some other articles I made.

• 1895 Counter-Revolution in Hawaii
• Hawaii Democratic Revolution of 1954

—Hawaii Samurai (talk) 10:37, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries! Wow, you like your Hawaii articles, don't you? I'll take a look in a minute. HJMitchell You rang? 19:54, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

• Hmm, 1895 Counter-Revolution in Hawaii could really do with a few more inline citations, especially for any facts that are likely to be challenged, though I'm guessing from the relative obscurity of the subject (that the article itself admits) that they might not be too easy to come across.
• As for Hawaii Democratic Revolution of 1954, the [WP:LEAD|lead section]] could do with a little work- it's supposed to concisely summarise the article, rather than provide an intro and, again, it could do with a few more refs but other than that, they look fine. If you create an article with an interesting little "factoid" in it, try nominating for DYK. HJMitchell You rang? 20:43, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought I'd pop by and say hello! How's things been with you since we last spoke about The Bill? Been out today bought myself a new computer keyboard, the key signs were coming off the old cheap one that I had so went out today and bought myself a nice swanky Microsoft one!

Decided to leave the Dale Smith article for just now. I will still do work on it to get it up to GA status, but I'm going to be very busy over the next month what with work and Xmas and I'm also working on getting the Neighbours article up to GA status as well. I can only handle so much!

Have you seen the edit warring that's been going on at Lauren Branning's page? I mean, seriously! I actually had to request for it to be fully protected on Friday night and in my 18 months as an editor I've never needed to do that before! One person got blocked initially for a day I think but he's had his block extended because he chose to attack the person who blocked him. Another editor has been reported for breaching the 3 revert rule, what's happened to them I don't know, but I've never seen anything like it before.

Other than that I'm looking forward to the X Factor finale tonight, and of course to The Bill returning tomorrow. Only thing is now I'm going cold turkey with Neighbours as it's off for it's winter break from Five until 4th January! How are you though? --5 albert square (talk) 18:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, nice to hear form you! Sounds like you've got your hands full. What on earth was all that about? I see you've been having trouble with The Bill as well (writing as of 2010 when it's mid December. Seriously???). I've still got it on my watchlist but you always beat me to it! I bet some passing idiot will get the urge to vandalise it when it's back on air. I've been making the odd excursion to Wikinews, reviewing John Barrowman for GA and, of course, the good old new page patrol and copyediting Brad Pitt. Have you got a reviewer for Neighbours yet btw? How's wiki-life treating you in general (minus the edit warring!)? HJMitchell You rang? 18:43, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, besides as The Bill is an on-going serial drama, it doesn't really have series as such. Just sometimes it may disappear from ITV's schedules for few weeks due to other scheduling commitments from ITV's side, not The Bill's fault!

As for Lauren Branning, that all kicked off when the character temporarily left EastEnders on Friday after her parents split up. The actress has only taken time off to concentrate on her GCSE's or something, yet people were saying she'd left for good, others were saying she was returning in 2010 and some were even saying she can't count 5 Albert Square as her home anymore even though the rest of her family still live there! Tedder semi-protected it but one editor continued his own wee war and got blocked as a result.

Oh guess what? Out shopping yesterday and I bumped into one of The Bill's stars! I bumped into Siobhan Redmond who I think plays one of the crime scene investigators! Now why is it sod's law that I couldn't have done that a month or two back, might've saved us some time! Bumped into her in the ready meals bit at Marks and Spencer! I'm more annoyed at myself for forgetting that she was also in EastEnders for a few episodes as I've got another editor bothering me at Talk: Laurie Brett to find out Laurie Brett's date of birth. Google and IMDB have the wrong info so they're no good. Of course the actress she acted alongside in EastEnders would have to be Laurie Brett so she would've been the best person to ask for the answer, and I go and let her get away without giving me the blooming answer!

Other than that life is fine ta lol --5 albert square (talk) 19:18, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah well, "I asked her in M&S t'other day" is probably not a good source anyway! I never understood edit warring- it seems even more pointless than vandalism to me. Have people not got better things to do? I could think of a dozen things off the top of my head that are more useful to the wiki!

It'll be disappearing left right and centre next summer for the bloody football so make the most of it! Have you got a reviewer for Neighbours yet? HJMitchell You rang? 22:26, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, no it would probably not be a good source. Nope, no reviewer for Neighbours yet. That reminds me, I was going to set up a Wikipedia page for part of it's set, something still on my 'to do' list which always seems to get longer, not shorter! --5 albert square (talk) 22:36, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! There's always something needs doing! I'll take a look at it for you at some point- see if I can do anything useful. I suppose I could do the review since I'm not involved with the article. How long has it been waiting- I don't want to give an appearance of impropriety but if you've been waiting for bloody ages, I don't see the harm. What do you think? HJMitchell You rang? 22:51, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oh tell me about it! It's been waiting since about October time. I just looked at the cast section and it's a nightmare, repeated information, templates that no longer worked, you name it. I've just made some suggestions at Talk: Neighbours about how it can be improved. Yeah that would sound good! --5 albert square (talk) 23:41, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If you're happy with that then, I'll do it. Normally I wouldn't do it for an editor I "knew" (I think you're actually the most frequent editor of my talk page after me! Haha!) but hey, you've been waiting way too long really. I'll create the review page now, but then I'm going to bed, I've been up for nearly 30 hours. I'll make some comments in the morning. HJMitchell You rang? 23:54, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! --5 albert square (talk) 00:00, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Meh, for you, it's no problem. I've created the review page and updated WP:GAN. I'd suggest you watchlist the review page but I'll drop you a line when I've done my review. I anticipate this might not be totally plain sailing but I'm hoping it won't be as hard work as The Bill was! We'll see, anyway. Goodnight, HJMitchell You rang? 00:13, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

{undent}It's now added, I'll also post on all the regular contributors talk page and ask them to start contributing to it's good article status! --5 albert square (talk) 00:24, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good idea. I'm happy to discuss any points with anyone here or on the review page (ye, I'm still up, I caught a G12 in the new pages!). HJMitchell You rang? 00:28, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I am here to talk to you about the article I made. It says it will be a speedy deletion soon. It is not promoting any sites. I am only saying where the codes where from. I also made some of them. And I was going to add the picture of the game box with all its info later. I had spent 2hrs making the article so I needed a little rest. Then I wanted to see how it was doing and I see the notice.

Can you please not delete it?

IiDevil (talk) 19:12, 13 December 2009 (UTC) (iiDevil or IiDevil)[reply]

I hope HJ doesn't mind me posting a passing comment on his page.

I just noticed your message Li Devil and notice that the page has already been deleted. If you contact one of these admins they may be able to userfy the page for you. However this will depend on the actual page itself. Hope this helps :) --5 albert square (talk) 19:25, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry it took me so long to respond, and no 5asq, I don't mind you answering on my behalf, especially since I was offline briefly. IiDevil, if you follow the link 5 albert square provides, you can ask one of those administrators to email you a copy of the page. The reason it was deleted is that Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia of notable, verifiable topics not a place for people to post game codes (whether they're yours, someone else's or whatever). I don't mean to sound condescending by this, but try publishing them on a blog or somewhere, but not Wikipedia. Don't be put off editing though- no self respecting editor hasn't had a page deleted- it's happened to me twice! HJMitchell You rang? 22:40, 13 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK I wil contact one of those Admins thanks :3 IiDevil (talk) 22:50, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I've just seen that you'll be reviewing the Neighbours article for GA status. Just wanted to say hi and that me and 5 albert square are bracing ourselves for all the things the article may be pulled up on. I'd ask you to be gentle, but I don't think that's how it works. :) - JuneGloom07 (talk) 00:29, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No worries. I worked with 5asq on The Bill's GA bid and I think we understand each other. If there's a problem, I'll hold it open for as longs as it needs and I can help you with copyediting issues. I explained to 5asq above that I'll start the review "proper" in the morning and drop you both a line when I've made my comments. Feel free to discuss anything here or at the review page, which I'd respectfully suggest you watchlist. I'll look forward to working with you. All the best, HJMitchell You rang? 00:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Have just seen your review and I don't think what you've said came as too much of a surprise, to be honest. I raised the issue of the Locations and Awards problem's last with 5asq. I guess I'll get to work then... :) - JuneGloom07 (talk) 19:33, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, don't be too disheartened, it's all doable. At least it's not a surprise to you. Have fun and just drop me a line if you need anything explaining or clarifying! I'll be on and off for most of the rest of the day. Best, HJMitchell You rang? 19:41, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you. I'm just going to try and work through the list starting with the lead, I'm using Eastenders and The Bill as a template for this. I'll be waiting for 5asq to come online and see what he has to say. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 19:58, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, another one that thinks I'm male!

If I'm quite honest, none of the review is a surprise. I've made a couple of minor edits meantime but I'll have a proper look at it later --5 albert square (talk) 21:19, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry 5asq! I suppose that's karma for thinking I was Australian. :P

I was just wondering when you have a minute, HJ, if you could have a look at the new lead for the article. I've edited and hopefully improved it. I know you mentioned that references shouldn't be included, but the Eastenders article uses them when it mentions awards, so I've done the same. However, they can be easily removed if necessary. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 23:36, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ha, June that's ok, HJ thought the same once too!

Anyway, I've made quite a few edits tonight, merged some sections together, when you get a sec could you please take a look let me know what you think?

Also, you say that the table is quite long. I'm going to be removing the cast section at some point and placing it on another page so quite a lot of that will be disappearing soon. I think I'm going to do it like EastEnders do theirs where there's reference to the template in the infobox but nowhere else --5 albert square (talk) 23:47, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, 5asq, you know better than anyone how much work went into The Bill before it was passed. If you and JuneGloom put as much effort into this as you did there, you'll have no troubles. At least you've got someone you know! Oh, and why don't you say you're female on your user page if everyone thinks you're male? Haha! I've never had the problem personally, but I am male (and English if anyone's wondering)! HJMitchell You rang? 01:18, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah I hope I don't have that sort of work again! I'm actually watching our old friend The Bill just now. And there's not a Wiki template that says "this user is female!" that I could find! I put that I like chocolate everyday (found a template for that), that should be a giveaway! --5 albert square (talk) 01:26, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

5asq, I have a 'This user is female' box on my user page. I think it was the Albert in your user name that made me automatically think you were male. Right, I'm going to bed, I'll get back to work on the awards page tomorrow. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 01:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've just welcomed them and asked them if they'd kindly refrain from adding that in to the article. Hopefully that'll solve the problem. I'll have a look at Neighbours in a mo and see how it's coming along. HJMitchell You rang? 02:55, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I've been working on the characters section for most of the day. I've moved the cast lists to a seperate article, except for the notable and guest characters as I wasn't too sure what to do with them. I've now decided to follow The Bill's example in displaying the notable cast members and I'm currently working on that. I was just wondering how many notable cast members would be appropriate to have on the main article? The list currently contains 22 actors and characters and I was thinking of cutting it down to about 13 and placing the rest on the newly named/created List of characters from Neighbours. What are your thoughts? - JuneGloom07 (talk) 18:05, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're on the right lines, definitely. I'd suggest you copy The Bill's format:

Actor played character from Year X to Year Y (or present)[ref]. Actor has appeared in...[ref]. Leave plot and character information (except for the reason for a character being written out) for the actor's and character's entry respectively. Keep it to a nice concise summary and keep the list as short as you can without omitting anyone important and put {{main:List of characters from Neighbours}} at the top of the section. How's the rest of it coming along? Keeo uo the godd work and drop by if you need anyhting (I'll likely be on here or Wikinews until the early hours!). Best, HJMitchell You rang? 19:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, I've been following that method and it's going well. I would say my only problem is with actors like Russell Crowe who played a character who isn't notible enough to have their own page and only played them for a few episodes. The actor is more notable then the part. I'll try and work with whatever info I find, I guess. I think the article is going okay so far. I've mainly been working on the awards (Neighbours has won more than just Logies, it turns out) and the character sections. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 20:37, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well if the actor is notable but not the character, I'd be inclined to say he shouldn't be included in that list. What I suggest you do for that kind of thing is create (another) new article- something like List of celebrity guest appearances in Neighbours for that kind of thing and, underneath your main article hatnote, put {{see also|List of celebrity guest appearances in Neighbours}} and put a little prose in there about the actors (again, I'd suggest following The Bill) and a sentence or two about the celebrity guests. Any help? HJMitchell You rang? 20:49, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's been a great help, thanks. I have 10 more notable cast members to complete. I'm just debating whether to add Alan Fletcher and Jackie Woodburne to the list. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 00:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent)Hi, don't worry, I was in the middle of editing Neighbours: Celebrity Guest Appearances when you messaged me! It's just that Wikipedia has a habit of logging me out after a while so I kinda created the page, dumped the names, saved it and then went looking for another template to use! Anyway it's taken me all night but the template on it should be looking ok now. Meanwhile I'm off to do some rollbacking before bed! --5 albert square (talk) 00:52, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(June)Glad to be of help. I'd consult with 5asq with that because I don't know anything about Neighbours! If you think their role was significant enough, add it in.

(5asq)No worries, it does that to me randomly, too! Bloody annoying if you're in the middle of editing! I'll have a look and see how things are coming along. Have fun rollbacking. Let me know if you see anything particularly amusing! I'll be on the new pages for a little while if you want me! HJMitchell You rang? 02:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, nothing so far, I wanna go to bed but I just ain't tired!! Last night I did come across something interesting though, someone stating on their talk page that they wanted to murder someone. Needless to say that I suggested that they were blocked and their talk page wiped! Oh and our little friend has been back at The Bill's pages. He only got unblocked yesterday from the last vandalism he carried out on the factual info we have on Dale Smith! He's now blocked again but this time for 3 months. Needless to say I'm expecting sockpuppetry to happen --5 albert square (talk) 03:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Why do people bother? Where was he this time? Might be worth checking the WHOIS report. If you get more trouble, just revert 'em and take it straight to AIV or (for more eyes and a more complicated situation, ANI). It never ceases to amaze me what people write on here!

Ha, yeah this time he was active on List of The Bill episodes/19. That editor never ceases to amaze me. This time he invented a police constable called William Race, when I reported him I just included a link to The Bill's official website and told admin to look on that if they thought it was a good faith edit. Admin can't argue with facts! --5 albert square (talk) 03:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

WTF? And yes, they can argue with fact! If you've ever weighed in at ANI or AfD...! Haha! Anyway, I'm now going to bed because it's getting on for 4am and I have real world things to take care of tomorrow. I'll be on here and WN when I get up and in the evening so say hi if you need anything! HJMitchell You rang? 03:46, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at JuneGloom07's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Finally, you have a blue bar from me. :P - JuneGloom07 (talk) 17:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

moved below HJMitchell You rang?

User:Viriditas/John Barrowman - It's gonna take a few days. Feel free to help out if you have access to the sources. Some (possibly many) appear to be online. Viriditas (talk) 11:25, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do! I had a look at copyediting it yesterday. Keep up the good work. HJMitchell You rang? 16:59, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know how much of a sleuth you are, but if you can find this interview anywhere, it might help: "Wayne, George. (Nov. 1995). "Johnny Handsome: Central Park West's fresh prince". Vanity Fair; Conde Nast Publications, Inc. Issue 423, p.169. ISSN: 0733-8899. No biggie if you can't. Viriditas (talk) 03:03, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I found this, but it's onlly an abstract. I'll keep looking, see if I can find anything of more use. HJMitchell You rang? 03:13, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not a big deal, it just seemed to have some info that could help. Don't sweat it. I though maybe you might have someone in your family who had access to Vanity Fair from 1995 or a library.  :) Viriditas (talk) 03:17, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know of, unfortunately. 1995 is going back a way! I also stumbled across this while I was trawling through the web. Don't know if you've already seen it? HJMitchell You rang? 03:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's listed as the first reference in the link I gave you above. What you linked to is an old bio from 2002 (v.43). I have the new one from 2009 (you should be able to find it if you look hard enough, it's v.92) I can't find the US magazine article either. Viriditas (talk) 03:36, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, never mind. I just bumped into it while I was looking for the other interview, I'll swing by the article alter on. I'm just in the process of writing an article on Wikinews atm. Keep up the good work. HJMitchell You rang? 14:30, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On December 14, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Tim Cross, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits your article got while on the front page (here's how) and add it 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.

Materialscientist (talk) 11:35, 14 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Morning! (just) Sorry I havent been around, Been doing things like this Alan_Thompson_(swimming_coach) --220.101.28.25 (talk) 11:56, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well good morning! Nice to hear from an old friend! How's things down under? Glad to see you're still around! HJMitchell You rang? 12:09, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Some good, some a bit iffy. Got very involved in the famous 2009 Whitehouse Gatecrash Incident. Which happened, as things do, just as I wanted(needed) to go to bed. Got reverted for 'recentism' yesterday here Geoffrey_Edelsten#Personal_life. Started a real bunfight by asking an 'innocent' question here Talk:Animal_testing#Lead_Sentence. Worked on a bio here Alan_Thompson_(swimming_coach) expanding it from 2 lines to MUCH bigger. (Some 'funny business' allegedly going on in Ozzie Olympic swimming coaching) Otherwise, been all over the place. Take a look if you like, especially the Animal Testing 'discussion'. I think well sourced BLP are much safer! Getting late, may not be able to reply till tomorrow, if then. Regards --220.101.28.25 (talk) 13:44, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that's the trouble with trying to have a conversation with someone on the other side of the world! People do get a bit fussy about "recentism" on here because, obviously, an encyclopaedia is supposed to represent things in historical context. I might take a look later on, I'm on wikinews at the minute. It's a lot quieter on there than WP- they've got a dozen or so regular editors, compared to WP's several hundred and flagged revisions which is... different! I don't much like it myself, but then, with ~5500 edits here, I'm not used to it! Anyway, drop by tomorrow! It's always a pleasure to hear from you, HJMitchell You rang? 14:25, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article Bonxy has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

States that it is WP:MADEUP.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{dated prod}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{dated prod}} will stop the Proposed Deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The Speedy Deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and Articles for Deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Gosox5555 (talk) 22:45, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, nice template, but I didn't create the article. I've just moved it to the creator's userpage since that seems to be the intention of it and tagged for CSD R2 as a cross namespace redirect. Thanks anyway, HJMitchell You rang? 22:48, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... That appears to be a case of WP:Twinkle-gone-wild. Did you see the CSD template on the page? Article namespace pages can't (or shouldn't) redirect to the User namespace. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Gosox5555 (talk • contribs) 22:52, 15 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I put it on. WP:R2- a redirect from mainspace to any namespace other than template... Yeah, I know CSD almost by heart. If it was Twinkle, it will have notified me because I'm the only contributor (since the history is at the new page location). Anyway, it was speedied as an R2 so problem solve. If I may, though, I'd suggest you check the page history before whacking the twinkle button because it's quite a potent tool that has the occasional tendency to f**k things up! It is useful, though! Best, HJMitchell You rang? 02:24, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, HJMitchell

Is there any pages that you would like me to write? I'll do my best. I promise. I've learned my lesson.

Faithfully, --Julia Howard 02:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

P.S. Merry Christmas! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dottyslurp (talk • contribs) 02:03, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, WP:Requested articles is a good place to start- pick a topic that interests you, find an article title you can handle and do a little research. If it's notable, create it to a decent stub (or better if you can) with a few decent references (google news and some of the pages on my subpage might be able to help. Or, if you're looking for something to kill a few minutes without getting committed, you can have a look at the recent changes and look for vandals (you might want to install Huggle or Twinkle (the one I use) to help you) and just revert them, warn them and, if you have to, report them. Alternatively, you might like to go to WP:GAN and review an article for good article status, then ask me or someone else to check it. If you get stuck or all of that just looks boring and you want more suggestions, just ask! Oh, and when you contribute to a talk page, you should sign your name with ~~~~ (you can change the look of your sig in your preferences. Merry Christmas! HJMitchell You rang? 02:44, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Isn’t it time you got some sleep? (Probably are by now. I am too SLOW writing back.) Don’t make my mistake of falling asleep over the keyboard (like me last night)! Noticed you had a look at the Swimming Coach article. Better than the stub it was! Another Ozzie Olympic coach (Terry Buck-deceased 2005) has no article at present, one was created but deleted [2] about the 9th as it was an attack page. He competed in 1964 Olympics, but has now been publicly accused of more than 'innapropriate' behaviour towards his students. I have collated info. on him & references here on my talk page, including pro and con reports.

1. Is Terry Buck a suitable topic, at this time, for an article?
2. When I leave a message like this do you get a “notification” box come up on your screen? If yes, easier than using the “talkback” thingy.
3. Do you know anything about radio, RF, etc? Or know an editor who does and can explain things simply? I need help simplifying related articles that are written in such a technical way (or so poorly by non tech savvy (or POV) editors) that I can’t understand them. And I am/was a Radio Technical Officer by training. If I can’t follow them, how can the average reader?

Wow, OK, one thing at a time!

• I'll have a look at that material for you and give you a yay or a nay in a mo
  • If it was zapped as a G10, then it will raise an eyebrow if it's recreated. I'll find the admin who deleted it and drop them a note.
  • You'll have to be careful to source information about those accusations and writing neutrally about them
• Yes, I get a big orange bar that says I have new messages that doesn't go away til i click it. I believe you get one, even though you don't log in?
• I don't know anything about that sort of thing. I'm sure there's someone on WP who does, but i can't think who off the top of my head. One of these templates might be helpful in the meantime.

I'll be back in a few minutes and I'll tell you if he's suitable for an article and answer your other questions! Guessing by the hour though, you've probably gone to bed. HJMitchell You rang? 15:33, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is one thing I have re-written and left on the articles talk page for comment. It’s about the Thing (listening device/BUG) that WAS found in a US Embassy. See if you can follow it. Text below line is NEW text by me that I need to cite, though I KNOW it is correct, and this section is not cited in the article anyway. I went back to the references (#3&4) that are used and found the current text does not follow it. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 06:14, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Still here, shouldn't be. Need to get some sleep. Was up collecting info for Second Sydney Airport
Yes I do get a message bar if someone puts a message on my talk page. Found out it worked that way when I logged onto my page from another physical location/IP. Thought the tallback 'thingy' was the only way to do that.??

Not too fussed about the swimming coach thing. I was able to access a cached version of the deleted article, but not any more. It was all negative. But I have his Olympic stuff as well. Have more important things to do actually which I am neglecting. --220.101.28.25 (talk) 15:56, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was about to leave you a "talkback" but you beat me to it! I had a look at the stuff you've collected and I think there's enough there to write a decent article. If you want somewhere to keep it without crowding your talk page, feel free to stick it in one of my subpages- User:HJ Mitchell/Sandbox is empty atm. I don't mind people editing them, and it gives you more room on your page. If you want to do that, I can just create it for you (you need an account to create a page) and leave you to it. I'll let the admin who deleted it know first, though (there's a good chance it's someone I know, I'll check the log). Isn't it past 3am there? I thought only I edited WP at that time in the morning! HJMitchell You rang? 16:13, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes it is past 3am. I'll think about the Terry Buck article. Not too worried about the space it's taking unless there is a limit to my talk page usage? I can, well I have already haven't I?, write the article ready to be 'dumped' onto the Article page as soon as needed. No deadline, and I need to check what is happening with the allegations.
Many people swear they shared a room with him and nothing happened. There are also business dealing mixed up in it so maybe the accuser has another motive? BUT these things happen. Just last 24 hours some guy got busted here for going up to kids in different McDonalds'and kissing them!!
Teddy tells me its time to sleep. Bye!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 16:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No, there's no limit. I just thought you might want somewhere to put it but if you're happy with it there. Fair enough, let me know when you want to do it and I'll just create it for you. Probably sensible! Drop me a line when you're online next. HJMitchell You rang? 16:50, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, go ahead and re-create it. You may want to "sandbox" it first, and add {{inuse}} while you're at it. Bearian (talk) 16:37, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thankyou. I believe 220 is working on it on his talk page to put into article space as and when. I just thought it was worth letting you know my plans since you deleted it and especially since it was deleted as a G10 rather than an A7 or something. Best, HJMitchell You rang? 16:57, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, this was about the coach who had some sex scandal, right? It needs to be reasonably balanced and properly cited. Bearian (talk) 17:19, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Of course, as should any WP article. From what I can see, he's notable for being a swimming coach who happened to get himself into an abuse scandal, as opposed to being notable as an alleged child abuser who happens to have been a swimming coach. It's definitely something I'll keep an eye on, though I won't myself have a lot to do with the article besides that and formatting. Thanks for your help, HJMitchell You rang? 17:30, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

← HJM if you are reading this in real time it's late! ZZZZZ time!. I just checked and, at least, there is no other "Terry Buck" on Wikipedia. I checked WWW previously and I recall that there ARE others on the Internet. Need to ensure they are not mistaken for THIS Terry Buck. (hell there are heaps of me on the Internet and VERY notable people too!!! More famous than me anyway.)
Buck does get a mention HERE and HERE. He was HEAD Coach of the Ozzie OLYMPIC Swimming team. Apparently only person in Oz to compete, coach, manage at Olympic/International levels. So notable yes. Will have to see how the allegations pan out, if others come forward. There was mention of a list of 29 people given to police by the original complainant.
Would need to be named “Terry Buck (Swimming coach)” to disambiguate, and consistency with other existing articles. All in good time, no deadline! Now, I have to go and do real world things. Later!--220.101.28.25 (talk) 03:43, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

OK, since there's not other individual of the same name currently on WP, I believe the MoS says we we go with just the name. If it matters, we (or I) can create a Terry Buck (disambiguation) later on but there's little point if it's full of red links. If a more notable individual comes along, it's easy to move it to a less ambiguous title (or it is for me, with an account, 2 clicks). What are the others notable for? I can create them for you if you want to write about them, but I'd suggest one at a time!! I'll not be on much today (my birthday) because I've got a 12 year old single malt in my cupboard! Drop me a line, though, and we'll sort something. As you say, there's no dealine. HJMitchell You rang? 11:52, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In what way? Don't you do that when you patrol articles? Deb (talk) 22:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply. Yes, I do. I spend a considerable amount of time patrolling new pages, but I give them a few minutes before I start adding tags unless it's so dire it needs to be deleted, for the same reason Special:NewPages advises against tagging articles with A1 or A3 "moments after creation". I personally feel it's better to wait a few minutes and see what the creator does next because nobody can create a Featured Article in one edit. Regards, HJMitchell You rang? 22:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Did you notice that I also fixed the references section? Deb (talk) 22:43, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I did, yes. Thankyou- I actually got an edit conflict with you attempting to do it myself. I've created a fair few articles and every time I forget to add reflist in my first edit. HJMitchell You rang? 22:47, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, in time you won't. The thing is that, when I'm patrolling new pages, I'm going through them very quickly and I don't spend time checking whether the contributor is new, I just flag them up if appropriate, so that someone else sees that they need work. There are contributors who look out for that, and you'll usually find that an article with the uncategorized tag doesn't stay that way for long! You might argue that I should do it myself - and sometimes I do - but there are so many new articles that I just like to whip them off the list as quickly as possible. It's nothing personal. Deb (talk) 22:53, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I know where you're coming from. I personally use popups to tell me about the author (it gives you their rights, first edit date and edit count). I know it's nothing personal- it's hard to make it personal when one patrols hundreds of pages, though I did have someone vandalise my user page earlier because I marked their page for CSD. I still think it's worth waiting a few minutes before tagging brand new pages, but I suppose everyone has a different approach to new page patrolling. Thanks for your help and for replying. HJMitchell You rang? 23:20, 16 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you're right, I should get familiar with that facility. Deb (talk) 12:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Perhaps, one of the beauties of WP is that there are all sorts of things to make things easier or quicker. It's all just a matter of preference. Nice talking to you anyway- it's good to know I'm not the only one on the new pages! HJMitchell You rang? 15:25, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear HJMitchell,

Jauerback keeps telling me that I edited a message when I didn't. Oh, how do you change your username? I'm very curious about how Wikipedia works. It's the best!

                                            ---Julia Howard 01:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC) 

                                            Merry Christmas and happy new year of 2010!  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Dottyslurp (talk • contribs) 01:15, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply] 

The awards section (List of awards and nominations received by Neighbours) is pretty much done, at last! I just have to add some more refs and add an 'Other Awards' section and it'll be complete (hopefully). I'll try and start work on some of the other points on the list tomorrow. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 01:08, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've been looking at the 'Video Game' section and I'm not sure it can be expanded beyond what it is. There isn't much info about the game online (I struggled to find the current reference for it). I was just wondering if we could get away with combining the section with 'DVD releases' under a new heading like, 'Home Media'? - JuneGloom07 (talk) 16:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

No offence, but that's a horrible phrase! Besides, I think it's probably OK where it is as long as it has essential information and a reference. It's not that important in the scheme of things so I'd advise leaving it there. The characters section is definitely much improved- aesthetically and in terms of content. I'd suggest that you stick with only the most notable, though- those who have been in it for a considerable amount of time (are there any who've been in it since the start?) and actors who are well known for Neighbours but have had other notable roles (Kylie, Donovan?). HJMitchell You rang? 17:06, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You're right, that was a horrible phrase. Okay, I'll leave the video game section as it is. There aren't any characters who have been in the show from the start. Paul Robinson appeared in the first episode and is currently still in the show, but he left in 1992 before returning in 2004. Lou Carpenter is the currently the longest serving character, having been in the show since 1992. I have listed them both at the bottom of the notable cast members list. Kylie and Jason are also included in the list. - JuneGloom07 (talk) 17:49, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha! The video games section is good- it inspires you to go hunting for more info to make it appear longer in order to impress the GA reviewer, meanwhile, if more info is released in future, someone else might be inspired to add it in. That's the beauty of Wikipedia! As for the cast, are all those characters notable? I'm sure most of them are, and I'm aware that The Bill's is quite long, but if there's any that could be removed, it might be an idea. HJMitchell You rang? 18:24, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed Radha Mitchell from the list in the Neighbours article to the main notable cast list on the List of characters from Neighbours page. That leaves 10 notable cast members listed in the Neighbours article, is this still too many? I could probably delete one or two more. Should I try and cut down the main notable cast list on List of characters from Neighbours? - JuneGloom07 (talk) 18:35, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

If they can be removed without the list lacking something, go for it. As for the last, what we did at List of characters of The Bill was to duplicate the list of notables, List the current cast and upcoming changes and then list all past and present cast in alphabetical order with all the character and plot info there (spread over four different list articles!). It was kind of thrust upon us because there was a mass AfD and listifying long before I signed up to WP but it works! HJMitchell You rang? 22:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi HJ, I was just looking at the list of things to do for the Neighbours review. I'm a little confused, you mention for the locations section to put it prose and not in a table. I'm not sure what you mean by that though as it's not in a table? Also you say under the broadcast schedule that the prose needs a little work, I've looked up WP:PROSE and to be honest I can't understand a word of it! Nor can I see how it's relating to any of the Neighbours article, therefore am really struggling to understand what's needed --5 albert square (talk) 01:42, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Indeed I do. That is strange. Just ignore it until I can figure out what I meant! Haha! Are you working on that section? I have some concerns about it that I don't think I articulated properly in the review. I think there's a lot of fluff in there and some of it may be OR. That may be one of our biggest hurdles to GA but if it can be shortened to include only the most relevant inforamtion (remember we're an encyclopaedia not a fansite and many people reading the article are likely not to give a flying f***!). Sorry for the confusion there, I'll let you know if I figure out what I meant! Any other issues you've come across? Btw, I saw you reverted the edit I flagged up on The Bill. HJMitchell You rang? 01:59, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Haha I'll leave that to you then. With the article I'm struggling with the parts that are needing work on WP:PROSE as I really don't understand a word of what that page says! I don't see how any of it is relating to Neighbours, particularly the storyline section.

With The Bill, I reverted it because the only evidence I could find to state that it was on 3 times a week was some sort of fansite for Sean Bean! I certainly don't remember it being on 3 tmes a week unless STV screened it twice a week and ITV screened it three times a week. However even that wouldn't make sense as ITV would be 'gaining' 1 episode per week making them 'gain' an extra 3 months of episodes per year, STV would be left trailing way behind if that happened! --5 albert square (talk) 02:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't read that page (frankly, I have better things to do! I've read the "front page" of the MoS and the more important style guidlines but even as a copyeditor, I've not read them all!) but basically, a GA should be "relatively well written" which means, in terms of prose, that sentences flow neatly into one another, it doesn't jump around the place and makes the point concisely. It doesn't have to be as "engaging" as a FA but it should be pleasant to read. For example, "the cat sat on a black mat and later proceeded to put on a hat" read a lot better than "the cat sat on the mat. The mat was black. The cat then put on a hat." Basically?

• avoid short sentences where you can combine a few to make one better sentence
• write it for the readers (sounds daft, I know). Try to engage them with your writing.

If that's no help, I'll try and help you out in the morning. I'll be around for an hour or so but I'm working on something else so I can't really commit but I'll offer advice here as and when you need it so don't be afraid to query anything! HJMitchell You rang? 02:44, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(undent)Hi again HJ, I've re-worded the storylines section so hopefully it should now be more prose. The 2000s section was originally split into 4 sections, I've now merged that and made it two sections. I didn't really see the point in splitting it up so much, however I've left the 25th anniversary as it's own section. The fact that Neighbours are going to the bother of revamping the set and the theme tune for it obviously means that they're going to make a big deal of this and it's going to be notable so therefore in my opinion it merits it's own section. Could you please take a quick look over this later and check everything is ok? --5 albert square (talk) 03:24, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Will do. I agree with you on all of that. It didn't need to be split into that amny sections- there are quite a few section headings that could easily be taken out if you ask me. The 25th anniversary stuff can have a separate heading- as I recall we did something similar with the live episodes of The Bill. That's where the good prose comes into play- if you can flow between related topics easily, it makes it much more engaging to read. I'll take a look as soon as I get chance and then again when I get up to make sure I didn't miss anything as frequently happens when one edits at 4AM! You're doing good work. HJMitchell You rang? 03:48, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, HJ Mitchell. You have new messages at 5 albert square's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Hi again, ok it would appear that despite the fact I WAS working on the storylines section to make it more storyline like, one editor has decided that it's not worth putting in the article and has deleted the entire section! Does the article still look ok to you or would you rather that the storyline section was re-inserted? --5 albert square (talk) 12:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be inclined to say that's an editorial decision. I think some of the information is useful but we don't have a "storylines" section in The Bill as such. It might be better to reinsert small bits of into a history section or something. It might be worth starting a thread on the talk page and inviting the other editor to discuss it with you. It's not my place to dictate how it should be laid out- I just tell you what you need to do to get it to GA. How you do it is up to you but, as a friend not a reviewer, I'd say that if you're going to revert, raise it on the talk page. Have you asked June Gloom 07 she thinks? Any help? HJMitchell You rang? 12:41, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's ok I spoke to the editor concerned, he just hadn't looked at the talk page before making the edit tsk tsk! only kidding! It was a good faith edit so I asked the editor to join in with the GA stuff and I can see he's quite happily tapping away at his keyboard as we speak! I was going to see what needed done just now but I think June is also on the article at the moment and you know what they say about too many cooks! --5 albert square (talk) 21:20, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. Can't hurt to have another pair of eyes on it but you don't want to be getting edit conflicts- there's nothing more annoying! I've just added you a couple of sentences to the awards section- I don't have time but could you add some of the refs from the awards article to it. HJMitchell You rang? 21:35, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, sure I'll do it later on once everyone's stopped editing. Quite a few of your points, if not all of your points now covered on Neighbours! --5 albert square (talk) 21:54, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I've created the MV Danny F II article, and noticed you'd created the Sinking of the Danny F II article. I feel that the best option here would be to redirect your article to the article on the ship which I created. What do you think? Mjroots (talk) 08:26, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Go for it. Fell free to merge or cut and paste anything in mine that's useful. I've nominated it for ITN, but it's easy enough to change a link. Probably best to keep it together- no use duplicating content and if the sinking gains further notability (unlikely, but I've done a few of these and you can never quite tell) we can always split again. I'll change the relevant links and help out on yours since you've got the aesthetics (I'm no good with infoboxes and similar fiddly things!). Best, HJMitchell You rang? 08:38, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

On 18 December 2009, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article MV Danny F II, which you recently nominated. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.

--BorgQueen (talk) 15:19, 18 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear, HJMitchell

How do you change your username?

                                Sincerely, --Julia Howard 23:50, 18 December 2009 (UTC)