Fort Towson

Just thought I would inform you that I re-added Islam because the point of the review is to discuss the repeated protection of the article due to disputes which means that we are reviewing the instability of the article. Please keep Islam on the list until the review is complete Alexfusco⁵ 03:01, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Why did you repeatedly close this because of the protection as it was the original cause of the FAR. I have started a discussion but I cannot move it back due to the bot archiving. Alexfusco⁵ 22:49, 9 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joelr31, I edited the Puerto Rico page and added the gallery to the Administrative divisions. Compared to State articles which many of them contain a table gallery of their important cities, Puerto Rico's is extremely dry and and pretty much only text. I would still like to add a similar feature to the article whether it be in administrative, geography or what have you, but get back to me so that we can collaborate before anymore of my editing gets simply just removed, because it takes time to search picture's correct names and place them into the table. 192.195.66.48 (talk) 18:23, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The previous post was done by me before i logged in Tom Vazquez (talk) 18:24, 15 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the initial note, but people are still inappropriately voting "keep" ... Cirt (talk) 19:58, 16 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

• I have laid out my specific points about WP:OR violations within the article in detail, and yet only one user Haukurth (talk · contribs), specifically responded to any of these points. Respectfully, I defer to your judgment and that of Marskell (talk · contribs) for the rest of the FAR proceedings. My points were already made in detail at the top of the FAR - the rest seems to be, unfortunately, just a generalized debate over things that should instead be discussed at the talk pages of either WP:OR, WP:RS, or WP:V. Cirt (talk) 21:46, 16 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]
• Can you please help at Wikipedia:Featured article review/A Tale of a Tub? There are one or two editors so far that have actually responded to the specific points that I raised - but other comments are attempting to divert the discussion from WP:OR in the article itself - to an ad hominem overgeneralization and outright negation of all of my comments as a whole! Cirt (talk) 03:52, 17 January 2008 (UTC).[reply]

Thanks Joel. I begged a few people to comment on that one and got nothing. It was bothering me. Once the reviews get passed two months, something must be done with them. Marskell (talk) 08:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		The Random Acts of Kindness Barnstar
		Thank you! I've been trying to get those last few pesky citations for ages! Now I can start thinking about getting the article promoted. You're a prince. :-) Serendipodous 20:41, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ah ha! I knew you were a spy. A vicarious thank you from me on Serendip's behalf. Passing along a paper really is a random act of kindness that can be especially helpful. Marskell (talk) 22:19, 27 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joel. Next time you log-in and look at FAR, I'd argue against closing Blackface, even if you see removes as the most recent comments. I'm trying to be fair, because I know there's editors working. There's also been some dispute, so I'd like that to work itself out, even if it takes time. Cheers, Marskell (talk) 21:09, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Because you were so generous last time, but I was wondering if you could help me access this paper. I just need to know if Herschel ever calls Enceladus and Mimas anything other than "satellites". I understand if you're too busy but I really would appreciate it. Thank you. Serendi^podous 19:57, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Oh well, thanks anyway :-) Serendi^podous 07:46, 17 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joelr31, maybe we can find a reference to support the plenary powers of the US Congress and the quotation stating "postal system, social security, and mining activities and minerals, among other areas". Do you know what authoritative and reliable source this can be attribited to? CallmeDrNo (talk) 21:09, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I would also like a source for the "plenary powers" statement, mostly because it was added by a user that was involved in edit warring over the "Chief of state" matter and may be pov, does the Puerto Rican Constitution directly declares that the congress has "plenary powers" or is this just an assumption? personally I haven't seen the congress even employing such "power" in the island. Another thing that needs needs sourcing is the part that claims that the island's external relations are controlled by the federal government, wich may contradict a trend of actions that were hinted by the current administration, such as when it was suggested that Puerto Rico would directly buy petroleum from Venezuela and the several independent importation deals that have been promoted by Puerto Rico's government. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:20, 23 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This article cites no references, so its encyclopedic value is significantly diminished. Do you know of any sources for the claims made, or the references for the dates given? Maybe you could help me improve it if you know of them. I believe with a little research I could find one or two credible references for the dates given, but not for all the other claims made. Let me know. CallmeDrNo (talk) 23:23, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The March 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:42, 1 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hard one! We've both been very generous on FAR, and "as much time as you need" has become a central feature of the place. But you have to close them eventually... Too bad, in this case. Marskell (talk) 22:46, 2 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The article achieved featured article status with only three positive supporters. When it surfaced on the Main Page, it wasn't just me who doubted that it was up to the standard of a featured article. Much discussion has taken place on its talk page and at the Village Pump as to how this aberration could have happened. A review of the status of the article seems to me to be the best way to restore the standard rather than passively hoping that users will post comments on its talk page. Even if there were 100 adverse comments on the talk page, it would still be a featured article. I know it is embarrassing for an article to be reviewed so soon after its appearance on the main page but the issue shouldn't be ducked for that reason. JMcC (talk) 14:00, 11 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I concur with this. The discussion should not have been broken up without warning or a clear, easily accessible explanation.--Nydas^(Talk) 13:58, 12 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:56, 2 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am at a complete loss as to why this FAR was closed without making the article a featured article removal candidate. Notwithstanding that the FAR turned into a slugfest, the article has serious issues in that it's manifestly unstable, in dire need of cleanup (see SandyGeorgia's edits at the end), and has needed frequent protection. This should not be a featured article and I would urge you to reconsider. Stifle (talk) 14:33, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Stifle, please don't misrepresent me here; the article is not in dire need of cleanup (it's quite clean compared to what usually appears at FAR, but the newer editors continually insert MoS errors, which the older editors clean up). Also, please don't alter the articlehistory against consensus; it just appears in the error category. And on a final note, Raul doesn't miss anything on his talk page; there was no need to alter his talk page to call attention to this. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:19, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I see Stifle has now re-added the FAR to articlehistory, causing it to appear in the error category, and going against consensus. Stifle stated that he was initially a neutral, uninvolved party; is that still the case ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:26, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just to clarify that SandyGeorgia pointed out errors on the FAR page. The opinion that the article is in dire need of cleanup is mine only. Stifle (talk) 17:39, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

And those errors were and are continually cleaned up; again, this is one of the cleanest articles I've ever seen at FAR. I'm off for the afternoon, but I should add, Stifle, that your edits against consensus really set me back in my regular work this morning. I'm concerned that you're starting fires rather than calming them, and along the way, causing a lot of extra work for other editors. Raul doesn't miss anything on his talk page; consider what that's telling you. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:43, 16 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It didn't seem important at first, but now I think it would be better if Wikipedia:Featured article review/Barack Obama/archive3 were included in the Talk:Barack Obama {{ArticleHistory}}. This week at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)/1 we have had debates about instability and everyone is looking for established precedents. Obviously, the most famously dynamic page right now is Barack Obama. It would be better for the paper trail permanent record if his article history was all-inclusive. Please reply at my talk page.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 16:33, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joelito, the conversation is here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:44, 4 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Well, heck, TonyTheTiger started this same conversation in five different places, so now it's here, with suggestions from Gimmetrow/GimmeBot that might work. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 05:01, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Gimmetrow will be out for three days beginning 20:00 UTC April 24; if something has to be closed then, I can do it manually, but that's no fun :-) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This link on your user page is dead. I was looking forward to reading it, too! :) Gary King (talk) 07:56, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The May 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:40, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, I'm still in the middle of a merger between the current content and more material, but the format will need to be clean when its done. By the way, do you know which book its being referenced as Forshaw, we will need to add more fields to the footnotes including author, chapter, publisher and isbn. - Caribbean~H.Q. 18:30, 16 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, that will resolve any issues with the book references, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 13:53, 17 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joel, thanks for the updates, Cas asked Circeus for a final cleanup, this should be at FAC before June is over. - Caribbean~H.Q. 02:25, 16 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Circeus has completed the copyedit, I will nominate the article as soon as the distribution map is ready, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 11:20, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problem. - Caribbean~H.Q. 21:48, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The nomination just passed, during the course of it the article improved greatly, there might be a few things that can be slightly tweaked but the content seems quite solid. I will leave the decision of when to have it featured to you as creator, cheers. - Caribbean~H.Q. 05:09, 14 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Joel, I need some of your technical help again, I just moved "Category:FL-class Puerto Rico articles" to Category:FL-Class Puerto Rico articles" since the assessment template wasn't recognizing the title with "c" instead of "C" however the template in the articles are still recognizing the former title, the template format will need to be tweaked a bit. - Caribbean~H.Q. 17:33, 19 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. - Caribbean~H.Q. 23:12, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

List of Puerto Rican birds was selected as a WP:LOTD for one day in June and will be the LOTD during the month. Let me know before May 23rd if you have any date preferences.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 02:38, 21 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The June 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 13:11, 1 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It has already been scheduled at Wikipedia:List of the day/June 2008.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 20:04, 2 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. --Addbot (talk) 16:19, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joel, I have been editing sooo little this year that I hate making promises. But I will certainly try my best for you. Marskell (talk) 17:53, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ask Casliber, Mike Searson, Guettarda, Malleus Fatuorum, Dank55. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:58, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joel, I'll hang in on this myself. Really. Sandy will understand if it takes a little while. The prose is hardly terrible. Marskell (talk) 18:28, 19 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted eight days ago, PMAnderson brought it to FAR over, apparently, one paragraph. Wikipedia:Featured article review/Roman–Persian Wars. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:59, 29 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

You closed the Ronald Reagan FAR with the comment, "if you wish to reopen this FAR state your reasons." The first line said, "This article has problems on 1b and 1d (not neutral and comprehensive)." No one explained why the FAR was closed, except to say that FARs shouldn't be used if the article isn't neutral and comprehensive, which I didn't understand. I'm just curious, since I like reasons for things.Jimmuldrow (talk) 03:17, 1 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A proposal at Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Namespace for featured content pages to move some pages (unsure which) of the featured processes to portal pages. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:10, 4 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The August 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. MeegsC | Talk 01:03, 11 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

		Zen Garden Award for Infinite Patience
		to Joelito, the feathered critter took a looongg road but got there in the end. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 12:10, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, sorry I unilaterally moved the Mark Felt FAR to FARC, but I had left a message with Raul and he didn't bother answering until much later (after I made the move), and I didn't really feel like chasing people all over the place for something I thought was pretty simple. Anyway, I see it got taken care of in the end, so thanks. (Morethan3words (talk) 06:50, 19 August 2008 (UTC))[reply]

The WikiProject Puerto Rico Newsletter Year II - Issue 1 - Summer 2008
"Confía en tu propia voluntad más que en hombre alguno sobre la tierra. Esa es tu fuerza, no soy yo tu fuerza. Tú mismo eres tu fuerza!" - Luis Muñoz Marín
From the editor Hello, Joelr31. This is the fifth issue of WikiProject Puerto Rico's newsletter. The newsletter is intended to help all members to keep up with the latest news relating to the project. I will continue Eddie's format and willingness to include new material by request. As he once said, please help with the newsletter by suggesting content to be included on the newsletter by leaving a message on my talk page. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Se levanta un gigante dormido Saludos to all, I present to you the new version of our project's Newsletter. It has been almost a year since the last edition, but rest assured that we haven't been lazy. Our Good Article count has raised by 11, while we have produced two Featured Lists and two Featured Articles. I will tweak the delivery format, from now on the Newsletter will be delivered per season. That means four anual editions, one for summer, fall, winter and spring. Speaking of summer, it has been a hot one, make sure to check out the project news below. I will also introduce a new section titled "Puerto Rican Highlight" where we will comment about positive accomplishments reached by Puerto Ricans and our representative organizations. - Caribbean~H.Q. 01:17, 29 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]	Users who helped with this newsletter Caribbean H.Q. (talk · contribs) Other areas where you can help Please help in Puerto Rico's Featured Article initiative. Please help Marcos maintain Portal:Puerto Rico. An image for you! Majestic isn't it? That's the Arecibo Observatory, it has the largest single-aperture telescope ever built.
Project News Automotivado joined the project on July 24. We welcome him and recognize his efforts in Puerto Rico Islanders and other articles covering Association football in Puerto Rico. Keep up the good work! Reverie has returned after an extended hiatus. She needs help finding new projects for her portfolio, if you have any image requests, please help her in this task. Román Baldorioty de Castro, Francisco Coimbre, Lolita Lebrón and Félix Trinidad are now of Good Article quality. List of Major League Baseball players from Puerto Rico passed Featured List Nomination on July 10. Puerto Rican Amazon passed Featured Article nomination on August 14. A fact from Hector Feliciano was featured in the "Did you Know?" section of the main page on August 16. Puerto Rican Campaign is currently a Good Article nominee, suggestions for improvement are welcomed.
Puerto Rican Highlight On August 3, Tarah Gieger became the first athlete from Puerto Rico to win a gold medal at the Summer X Games. (ESPN Deportes) In 2007, Gieger also became the first woman to participate at a Motocross des Nations, being part of Team Puerto Rico.

Addbot (talk) 06:48, 1 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At WikiProject Amphibians and Reptiles, we recently did a purge of the members list, which your name was on. Please re-add your username as well as your area of expertise at our list of participants if you plan to stay active in this Wikiproject. Also, a discussion is going on regarding the standardization of taxonomy in lizard articles, located in this section. We'd like to have some more voices in this matter. Thanks everyone! bibliomaniac15 23:11, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joel. We have an odd situation at FAC. Samuel Johnson has been up for some time; because Sandy is a co-nominator, she is not going to close it despite the overwhelming support consensus. Raul appears to be missing in action; he hasn't closed it despite numerous pleas on his talk page. And I have voted and probably shouldn't close it. That leaves you as the only "delegate". There is a thread open at here. Marskell (talk) 16:01, 7 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Raul finally closed it. Thanks for stopping by. Marskell (talk) 11:01, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the offer to help out, Joelito; I hope you didn't invest too much time into it, and if you did, I hope you enjoyed the article! Saludos, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:54, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The October 2008 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:22, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saludos Joel, como estas? I just finished a new article Puerto Rican scientists and inventors and would like to know what you think of it. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:53, 19 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The April 2024 issue of the Bird WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by TinucherianBot (talk) 07:46, 11 November 2008 (UTC) [reply]

Hi Joel. I will not be able to monitor FAR as closely as usual. To avoid repeating myself, I'll just point you here where you can comment.

I hope all is well. Marskell (talk) 15:42, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Also, Joelito, I forgot to tell you that Gimmetrow asked for a tighter schedule for GimmeBot, as the daily work was a strain on him. He prefers to run the Bot just after midnight UTC on Tuesdays and Saturdays (that is, early Wednesday and Sunday morning), so if you can do closures on Tuesdays and Saturdays, there will be less confusion. Saludos, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:37, 19 November 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Joelito, are you planning to segment some FARs and move them to FARC? Or were you thinking we should appoint another person? (No feedback from Raul so far.) Ten of the 13 FARs have been up longer than two weeks. Also, Marskell used to like to do the month-end archive closeout at Wikipedia:Featured article review/archive himself; would you like for me to do that for you when I close out the FAC archives and update WP:FAS? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 07:56, 1 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late reply. I was on vacation and had limited internet access. You can do the archives and update WP:FAS. I will segment the FARCs. Joelito (talk) 01:47, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Okay (hope you had a great trip). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:49, 3 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

At less than two days running, Wikipedia:Featured article review/Kingdom of Mysore hit more than 71KB, and it's fairly unintelligible. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:25, 7 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed. I will do something about it tomorrow. Joelito (talk) 01:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Much better now :-) Joelito, after some discussion with Marskell (I assume you've seen his page), I was going to e-mail Raul to propose adding a roving clerk to help out with the sort of things I used to do at FAR, and provide some help at FAC as well. The tough aspect of that is to not lose the few people that are so actively engaged in reviewing/improving at FAC/FAR, while giving us a hand with the day-to-day work. Would it be OK with you if I make a proposal to Raul for a roving addition, or do you feel that you won't need help at FAR? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:55, 9 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I will need help. I take vacations, days off, sick leave, etc. :-) Joelito (talk) 00:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

OK, same situation here :-) Marskell and I agreed on a proposal that would initially just give us some backup on the day-to-day stuff, not necessarily closes, but to work in to people who could help when we needed time off. Is it OK with you if I go ahead and propose that to Raul? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:05, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fine with me. Joelito (talk) 00:55, 10 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. I have a question regarding rules pertaining to name changes to a sub-article during FAR of main article. Here in this article, I had attached a sub-article called Kannada literature in the Kingdom of Mysore. As the article had expanded to include some Kannada language poets and writers from a larger area in the last few days (outside Mysore kingdom), I moved the sub-article to a new name which was more inclusve, which is Kannada literature, 1600–1900 CE and nominated for Peer Review. I meant to change the sub-article link in this FA article to reflect the name change sometime today. Fowler &fowler, the nominator of the FAR, promptly revrted the move calling it a controversial, though I am not sure what the controversy with the sub-article is. Please advice how to proceed. Is there a rule that a sub-article's name should not change when the main article is in FAR? If so, does it mean that all sub-articles remain frozen when a FAR of a main article is in progress?Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:07, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

What I am suggesting is not that the sub-article's name "remain frozen," but rather that when such a name change involves issues related to the FAR (and explicitly discussed in My concerns (#5)), it should be discussed on the talk page first. The page move certainly shouldn't be made without any explanation anywhere and with the "minor edit" box checked. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 22:37, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The page move was not done with a minor box check. I explained clearly in the "reason box". How am I supposed to know that you have linked one of your issues to a sub-article. BTW, Fowler, how could you complain about a sub-article in the main articles FAR.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:39, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the move summary I left when I moved the sub-article.moved Kannada literature in the Kingdom of Mysore to Kannada literature, 1600–1900 CE: Covers poets and writers over the entire Kannada speaking region. Fowlers claim that it was a "minor" edit box check is a falsification of information.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 22:42, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

It is? What is this? Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:04, 16 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Epa, Joelito, a reminder to add and remove it at WP:FFA and WP:FA. (No word from Raul on staffing questions yet.) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:13, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I completely forgot. Joelito (talk) 19:00, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No prob (did the same for Marskell and Raul; I hope someone checks on me!) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:05, 21 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(moved off User talk:SandyGeorgia#Seattle FAR)

I am closely monitoring FARs in the review stage and I am giving them enough time to work out the concerns brought up without the need for FARC. I will probably move the Seattle FAR to FARC soon since little action has taken place. Joelito (talk) 22:43, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Moving this off SandyGeorgia's talk page since it's more a question for you than her. Aside from SandyGeorgia's list that we just got, we hadn't gotten any new actionable items since the ones we fixed from the original nomination and we wouldn't have gotten SG's if I hadn't come to her asking her to take a look at the FAR. In instances where there is limited activity on a FAR due to lack of being told of things to fix, shouldn't the action be a procedural close? Granted, this doesn't apply to the Seattle FAR anymore, but I wouldn't think that if there was a drive-by nomination the FAR would be moved into a FARC. --Bobblehead ^(rants) 23:47, 9 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Even though drive-by nominations are discouraged in FAR, articles may be moved to FARC if other reviewers raise concerns which are not addressed. I have left this article in the review phase longer than usual due to the Christmas holiday season and to allow for more eyes to take a look. I may move the article to FARC if I feel that broader consensus is required. Furthermore, I handle each article on a case by case basis so the length of time an article is left on review or the closure speed of an article may vary. Joelito (talk) 02:41, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Joelr31

On Thursday, you removed the FAR discussion of First Crusade from the FAR page: [1]. I just thought I should let you know that the discussion itself is still open, and the article itself is still registered as FA-class. I'd sort out these outstanding issues, but I'm not sure how to do it. Any chance you could look into it? Terrakyte (talk) 20:09, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Usually a bot removes the FA star, archives the FAR and updates the talk page. I will ask the bot's owner to run it or I will update everything myself. Joelito (talk) 20:18, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The bot that closes the discussions runs on Tuesday and Saturday nights (Wednesday and Sunday just after 0:00 UTC); it will run tonight. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 20:19, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reminding me of the dates. I thought that it ran Tuesdays and Thursdays. Joelito (talk) 20:34, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. Terrakyte (talk) 20:47, 10 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your interest in Filberto's image. I supposed the FBI picture is an acceptable one, too bad they didn't photograph the shooting in Hormigueros. Ahora, antes y siempre, Colegio! --J.Mundo (talk) 13:52, 15 January 2009 (UTC) (class of 2001)[reply]

Hi. The FAR nominator, Fowler removed some content containing genuine concerns of mine about he FAR and moved it to the talk page. I have reverted that edit because I feel you should decide what should be in and what should be out. He has reverted me. Please look into this. Regards, Dineshkannambadi (talk) 18:18, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Could you please weigh in at :Do posts about editor behavior and motivation belong to the FARC Commentary?? Thanks. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 18:34, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Joel. RegentsPark, one of the FAR reviewers, seems to have shown a genuine interest in reading the book that Fowler calls Hindu Nationalistic in he FAR commentary. But clearly, Fowler seems to be trying to influence the reviewer here[2] and [3] in response to [4]. I would like to know if this is acceptable behavior on part of Fowler.Dineshkannambadi (talk) 19:57, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

user:DK Don't you think you're being a little paranoid?! You forgot to mention that RegentsPark also said this on my talk page! Do you want Joelr31 to censor what anyone can say on anyone else's talk page now? RegentsPark has been known to me long before he appeared on the FAR. You need to relax and stop snooping into my posts, and also stop cluttering up Joelr31's talk page. I'm sure he has enough headache running the FAR as it is. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:43, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am not a mediator nor is FAR dispute resolution. Your personal differences will have to be solved before progress and consensus can be achieved on any article where you both interact. Joelito (talk) 00:05, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Are you suggesting that after all this work on the part of many people, you will remove this article from the FARC and list it as an FA again, all because one editor, user:Dineshkannambadi, is trying to turn it into a dispute? Please note that three people have already voted "delist." A fourth, user:Docku, who is a very likely "delist" is traveling right now. If user:Dineshkannambadi has complaints about my behavior, he should bring it up at AN/I, WP:Mediation, or start a user conduct RfC, but all that has nothing to do with the FAR/FARC, which has been proceeding all along by appealing to the Featured article criteria. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:42, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

PS If you are suggesting that the dispute is my removing the posts about my behavior to the talk page, I'm happy to put them back in the FARC. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:43, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(unindent) I have restored user:Dineshkannambadi's posts to the main FARC page. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 00:50, 18 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Joel, in light of recent discoveries, I am proposing a consensus concerning the colors of the flag of Puerto Rico in neutral articles. Please see the project's talk page for further detail. Thanks for your time. - Caribbean~H.Q. 22:24, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You can move it to FARC. Check with User:Abecedare first. The same applies to Kalimpong. I'm afraid I do not have any time and shall not be editing wikipedia anymore. Regards, =Nichalp «Talk»= 08:27, 25 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An image that you uploaded or altered, File:Vieques seal.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree images because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the image's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the image description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Skier Dude (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC) --Skier Dude (talk) 06:54, 30 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I have nominated Homo floresiensis for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Thank you. Jan.Kamenicek (talk) 20:30, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

(copied from Sandy's talk page, since she said I needed to talk to you) Hi Sandy (Joel), I'm swamped so this is short and sweet... This is a borderline frivolous FAR. The complaint of incomplete is not supported by the specific points, as they reflect either a complete lack of careful reading on the part of the nom'er (see my comment 1) or a lack of apparent knowledge of how wikipedia works (see my comment 2). Any way to speedy end this one? Edhubbard (talk) 01:38, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The article has changed quite a bit since it was last reviewed.[5] However, the editor that started the FAR has not made a single edit to the article and brought his concern to the talk page one day ago. I will try to persuade him to start a discussion in the article's talk page instead. Joelito (talk) 02:31, 3 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]