This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
I ran through the lead for you; please address the inline comments and check that I didn't change the content too much. In short, the greatest immediate problem is the prose, something for which I don't have time to work on. Your best bet is to look for FA writers of movie articles (User:David Fuchs, User:Erik, User:Nehrams2020, User:Steve to name a few) and enlist their help. Also, check out WP:PRV for copy-editors. Cheers, Dabomb87 (talk) 00:51, 4 September 2009 (UTC)
I'll take a look at some point this weekend. If you haven't already, consider contacting one or more of the editors at the League of Copyeditors to take a look at the article. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 06:10, 5 September 2009 (UTC)
I went through the article and made various edits, please look them over and change things back in necessary. It looks like there are a few items throughout the article that are repeated, I would recommend reading through and keeping the first instance of the repeated material (or if it's more relevant, moving it to the section that focuses on it more). For example, the film received an award from a film festival, so the main details should be mentioned in the awards section. The plot section does not need to be sourced (since the film itself can be watched by readers to provide plot details), and it would be a good idea to remove the blog (unless that has already been accepted in the prior FAC reviews) as well as the IMDB sources. For the mention of the charity concert, was the entire $45,000 raised by just him singing the "Firefighters" song, or were there other singers/bands that performed? It would be beneficial to specify for readers. From the releases and debuts sections, I'd drop the aspect ratio, running time, and MPAA rating. For the statement "The film won the audience award for a family feature film at the 2005 Hamptons International Film Festival." it doesn't need to have four citations (the statement isn't controversial, for example). At most keep two citations for the statement. In the reception section, the Amazon review should be removed, and if there are any negative reviews available, one or two should be added to provide a balanced review of the film. Hopefully the above comments are helpful and if you have any questions about them or if you need assistance, let me know. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 05:13, 7 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi ATC! I see that Nehrams2020 has done a nice job copyediting, so I stayed away for a few days. There is still some repetition in both this article and the other that needs somehow to be eliminated. I've copied the cast section to my sandbox and put in the mdashes again so I could eliminate the repetition of the "starred as" in sentence after sentence. Have a look and let me know whether or not you think this is an improvement. If so, I'll go ahead and copy back into the article; if not I'll think about how to improve that section. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:16, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I just cleaned out the "Cast" section and made a "Casting" section, regarding casting and previous acting roles. I also just read what you said. I think that for the "Cast" section should keep the starred as as an exception of repetition. Look at this former featured article, it lists as repetitively. I also think that the em-dashes shouldn't be used that way; I know it was like that on the telvesion series for the "Crew" section, which I might of changed, and if not will probally look into. ATC.Talk 00:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
I think you're right, that's why I made the edits in my sandbox. I took the mdashes out of the television series article. We'll leave as is. I am going to reword the sentence about the band name one more time, based on the source, so there isn't a sentence that look like it might be WP:SYNTH if you don't mind. I'll have a look at what you've done to the "Casting" section too. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:39, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Do what ever you can as long as it follows all the policies including, e.g. WP:SYNTH, prose, good grammar, so it could meet up to FAC status. Keep on doing what you've been doing. I will also fix minor things if needed, e.g. spacing, etc. Thanx! ATC.Talk 21:02, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Alt text
Hi ATC. User:TFOWR is having a look and will let me know what needs to be done. However, looking at the image file, it needs a description. Something simple like The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie , I think would be fine. Reply at my talk page, as TFOWR has it watched. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:54, 12 September 2009 (UTC)
Naked Brothers references
Hi ATC. I think it's best to remove the two references that are being questioned, as FA articles have very stringent standards, Footnote 11 from All that Jazz is the source for the fact that John B. Williams was cellist in Wolff's band, which isn't all that important in this article. If I can find that information elsewhere in a different source, then it can be added back in, but for now I'd delete it. The Red Herring source (Footnote 23) is one of many at the end of a sentence, so unless it's a controversial fact, I think you don't need it. Let me know what you think, and then update the FAC page. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:10, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
I've found another ref for John B. Williams here. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:58, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
Those look great and more reliable! Also don't you put this tag up: {{Update}} to update the FAC page? Their is a big chance, since I am busy that I might not be able to edit on Wiki at all this weekend, so do you mind adding the references? Thanx! ATC.Talk 21:25, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Also doesn't updating the page mean that it is not accepted to FAC requirements? ATC.Talk 21:31, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi ATC! Glad you like those refs. I wanted to wait until you approved them before adding to the article. Will add them. I'm sorry, but I don't know about the {{Update}} template, but I can add a comment that the refs have been replaced. What about the Red Herring ref: is that still necessary? Truthkeeper88 (talk) 21:54, 18 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi Truthkeeper88, I think their was a misinterpretation because I never said anything about deleting the RedHerring ref tag. It is a magazine and I do think is reliable, also the other two reference's don't say that Albie Hecht is the CEO of Worldwide Biggies. But, what is it that FAC won't accept RedHerring? Is it because it's a magazine? I'll try looking for another source that says Hecht is CEO of Worldwide Biggies, and I guess it could stay deleted since FAC wont approve it. Thanx! ATC.Talk 15:25, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Oops, sorry. I read here in the first paragraph about Worldwide Biggies, but I think I misinterpreted the period in front of Executive Producer Albie Hecht for a comma. Sorry, bad eyes. At any rate, I think it should be easy to replace that source, and it's better to do so and get signed off. I'll be in and out today, so we'll get this sorted out. They won't accept Red Herring because it's an online source, borderline blog, and honestly for FA articles that's as it should be. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 16:06, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Thanks that should be great! ATC.Talk 18:01, 19 September 2009 (UTC)
Hey Truthkeeper88, how is linking Parodyoverlinking in the lead section of the article? I understand not linking documentary format but I think its necessary. What do you think? Thanx! ATC.Talk 21:48, 20 September 2009 (UTC)
I can see an argument for both sides. Parody in itself is a broad term applied to literature as well as film and tv. As such it doesn't really need to be linked, and personally I tend to prefer less linking rather than more. However, thinking about this, I realize that the audience for this article might not understand the definition of parody, and thus linking it is important. So, I'm afraid I'm not a lot of help. I understand why they'd tell you it was overlinking, but I also understand (and agree) why you think it's necessary in this artlcle. A compromise might be to link it further down, because overlinking in the lead tends to be a little annoying. Sorry I'm not a lot of help on this. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 00:10, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
That's okay, if FAC likes it like this their is probably no reason to complain and just leave as it is. Thanx! ATC.Talk 01:28, 21 September 2009 (UTC)
Hi ATC! Just wanted you to know that it's fine to reference multiple sentences only once at the end of the paragraph as has been done with the Chiquitos article. In some cases only one ref is used for the info in an entire paragraph, and it's not really necessary to add a footnote after each sentence. Also, that article is a little different from your articles, because much of it covers historical events, whereas yours cover living persons, and the BLP requirements are more stringent. Currently I'm updating Ernest Hemingway and in some cases multiple sentences are based on the same source so I only add the source at the end of the string. However, I am careful in that article because it's a fairly high profile subject. See this policy which explains that an inline citation should appear next to the material it supports. If an entire paragraph is supported, then the in-line citation occurs at the end. But, in the case of biographies, I think it's best to add more rather than fewer inline citations. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:59, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay, that makes sense. :) ATC.Talk 17:51, 10 October 2009 (UTC)
Didn't mean to add confusion here: I wasn't referring to the Naked Brothers article (I think the references are fine there) but this was written in response to your comment on my user page about another article I was working on. I don't think you should change the citations on the Naked Brothers. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:53, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
Please don't add new material to an article with a {{citation needed}} tag already in it. If you have something you're sure is true but can't directly prove it then it is best (especially with autism articles since they're heavily trafficked) to bring it up on the talkpage. -- SoapTalk/Contributions 22:36, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I had to walk out for a moment so I put that there only temporarily and I will add a citation in a few minutes. I didn't mean to cause a commotion. Happy editing! ATC.Talk 22:51, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
I just added the source. Check it out if you would like here. :) ATC.Talk 23:08, 11 October 2009 (UTC)
Edit summaries
Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. When you make a change to an article, please provide an edit summary, which you forgot to do before saving your recent edit to List of music prodigies. Doing so helps everyone to understand the intention of your edit and is especially useful when reading the edit history of the page. Thank you. BMRR (talk) 03:09, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
Re: I Saw Your Recent Edit to Naked Brothers Band TV Show
No problem. I guess I don't know all the grammar rules for Wikipedia since they are slightly different than what I've learned and found in grammar books. I was trying to make the song title formats consistent with the "list of episodes" page since the songs listed under each episode are italicized rather than quoted. JLKTENNIS43 (talk) 23 October 03:33 UTC
Okay, speaking of which I should revise those italics to quotation marks for the episode lists. Happy editing! ATC.Talk 20:41, 23 October 2009 (UTC)
Naked Brothers Band (The Movie): question
Hi ATC!
I have a question a about this section.
Paragraph 1 mentions that Nat had a band in pre-school and that the name of the band came from the bathtub incident, which suggests the pre-school band is the Naked Brothers Band.
Paragraph 2 describes the charity event and that Nat began to perform elsewhere after the charity event.
Paragraph 3 states the Silver Boulders broke up and the brothers decided to form the Naked Brothers Band.
I think the chronology is a little confusing. Was Nat's preschool band the Silver Boulders? If so, let's mention that in paragraph 1, and move the bathtub incident to match the beginning of Nat and Alex' band (in paragraph 3?).
Hope this makes sense. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:16, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I see your point but it doesn't explain the film's title in the lead section and they become The Naked Brothers Band again at the end of the film so... maybe you're right. Also, yes Nat's band in preschool was entitled The Silver Boulders. ATC.Talk 20:37, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes, you're right. But, I think it's best to make it as clear as possible for readers who aren't familiar with the chronology. Anyway, your fixes are good, and I'll keep brushing up, and then move over to the TV series article. I've been busy with work so haven't had too much Wikipedia time lately. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 22:05, 24 October 2009 (UTC)
I've made some of the changes suggested at the Peer Review. In general, I think the suggestions are excellent. Let me know what you think.Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:34, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I agree with all, but I question one of those suggestions. The source from the library was the only one I could find on Google with Ken H. Keller on it for the film. Unless, I try Dogpile. Let me check that, actually. Otherwise than that, I think we should do that to the article. ATC.Talk 03:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
To explain Polly and Michael's acting career premise, I think it should go in the lead section. I think I seen that with some film article on Wiki where they said the directors film...got this much money less than this film, etc. Do u think the lead or background would be better? ATC.Talk 18:16, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
I think it can be done with only one sentence (perhaps in the lead) and then maybe a little more elsewhere. Most of that information exists in the TV series article and can be lifted out. I'd do something like, "Nat and Alex, sons of Polly Draper (of thirtysomething) and Micheal Wolff (band director for the Arsenio Hall Show) are the stars of the movie." Sorry, doing this off the top of my head, but as you can see, it can be easily introduced anywhere and then moved around if necessary. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 18:40, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay that make sense, why don't I do it and you fix whatever I don't pick up on with that sentence. ATC.Talk 18:42, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay I fixed the lead section. What do you think? ATC.Talk 19:02, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Not bad. Eliminate the "musical prodigious" because it's grammatically incorrect, and it's best to focus on one change at a time. The info about Draper/Wolff is good though. Will be offline for a while and back later. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:06, 25 October 2009 (UTC)
Looking pretty good! Let me know when you're done and I'll swing through and smooth it out a bit. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:15, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I'm done. You can smooth it out now. :) ATC.Talk 10:09, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
(out) I am not sure reading this what questions I am supposed to respond to here.
I have not reread the article (just the lead), but agree that I was confused which name the band used in real life and in the movie (Silver Boulders or Naked Brothers) so any clarification there is good.
WP:LEAD says nothing should be in the lead only (it is a summary of the rest of the article), so please don't just put the parents' careers there (though they can be elsewhere and in the lead if you think they are that important). I am not that familiar with the band / movie, but I think mentioning the parents as actress Draper and jazz pianist Wolf in the lead is fine, then expand on that in the article (the movie really has nothing to do with Thirtysomething or the Arsenio Hall Show).
The lead also needs to make it clearer that the movie is fictional - although many of the characters have the same names as the actors, the plot is made up and they were not famous as musicians or actors when the film was made (imagine they became more well known after the success of the TV show).
Lead still could use some polish - there are copyeditors in the last section at WP:PRVRuhrfisch><>°° 16:03, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch: the article already explains about the Naked Brothers Band and Silver Boulders, as they were both the names of the band:
As a five-year-old Nat began to compose songs after listening to music by The Beatles, and as a pre-schooler, he and his friends formed a band entitled The Silver Boulders...After the break-up of the The Silver Boulders, Nat and Alex decided to revive The Naked Brothers Band.ATC.Talk 20:28, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Also Ruhrfisch: what exactly needs copyediting? Because Truthkeeper88 is on the League of Copyeditors and has been helping me for a quite a while. Thanx! ATC.Talk 20:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Truthkeeper88: I fixed the long quote in the releases and debuts section and was wondering if you could touch up on that paragraph I created from that long quote. ATC.Talk 20:51, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Also Truthkeeper88: Could you polish the new paragraph I made here. Thanx! ATC.Talk 21:07, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
I have only reread the lead, but I thought The film chronicles a fictional rock band and the plot shows how they manage their fame. Also, conflict revolves around a dispute that results in the breaking up and eventual reunification of the group. was pretty awkward. How about something like The film chronicles a fictional rock band and how they manage their fame and a dispute that results in the break-up and eventual reunification of the group. Glad Truthkeepr88 is copyediting it. Ruhrfisch><>°° 21:30, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
You're right, it is awkward. Thanks for the nice sentence! Sometimes this is slow going, but we're getting there, and your comments have been very helpful. Thanks. ATC, I've made a few tweaks to your edits. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 23:39, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
Yes your comments have been very helpful and thanx as well. ATC.Talk 00:38, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Thank you. Sorry about that. I was just asking User:SandyGeorgia if I added it right. ATC.Talk 21:49, 27 October 2009 (UTC)
Naked Brothers sandbox
Just so you know, I left a message here about the sandbox. Unfortunately I think I need to be gone for a day or so, but feel free to work there if you want. Also, we can use the sandbox talkpage to discuss changes. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:21, 30 October 2009 (UTC)
Finally got this copyedited here. I'm trying to strip out unnecessary words and phrases and to present a coherent organizational structure to ease readibility. It's still a little wordy for my taste, but I think it's ready to be copied into the article to see whether you like this kind of format for plot/cast & character. Sorry about the delay! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 15:12, 6 November 2009 (UTC)
Autism edit.
I responded on my talk page; I assume you're watching it. Eubulides (talk) 20:15, 1 November 2009 (UTC)
Re your most recent edit: isn't that a bit too terse? The natural question a reader would have when seeing "Autism is one of the Autism spectrum disorders (ASD)." is "OK, what are the other ASDs?". By not briefly answering that question immediately, the lead leaves the reader hanging. I'm not saying the lead couldn't be shortened a bit, but we don't want to throw out the baby with the bathwater. Eubulides (talk) 23:28, 2 November 2009 (UTC)
I'd revert that edit, yes. There's nothing wrong with the length of the article's lead, either before or after the edit; any problem is with the relative weights of coverage of various topics. Eubulides (talk) 01:31, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Hi, ATC! I wanted to commend you for reverting yourself on this edit after talking it through with Eubulides. Your skills as a Wikipedia editor continue to grow, and I'm glad you responded as you did. Best regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:09, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanx SandyGeorgia, happy editing! ATC.Talk 22:48, 3 November 2009 (UTC)
Question
Hi ATC!
Thanks for being patient while I was sick -- didn't expect such a long absence! I've brushed up the Plot and Cast & Characters section one more time, but had a question about Jonathan Pillot who is described as a "scornful man". Is Jonathan Pillot a man? If not, can you describe, in your words, the character he plays so I can reword accordingly, because scornful doesn't seem correct. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 01:39, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
Jonathan Pillot is a man (He is one of the producers for the film and is Cooper Pillot's father, although a source doesn't say anything about the connection with Cooper) and Jonathan portrays a (as Nat and Alex put it "jerk") so scornful would probably be better. After the band's food fight, he suggested to be there band manager because Cooper was just a kid; Jonathan also gave Nat and Alex his business card if Nat and Alex changed there mind. And then, once the band split he announced on TV with David, Thomas, and Josh that he was going to be there manager and that they want to change the name to the Gold Boulders. ATC.Talk 01:53, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the explanation. That makes much more sense. Personally, I like "jerk" but will think of something between "jerk" and "scornful". "Scornful" sounds too Victorian for this piece of work. How about something more modern such as "disrespectful", or "condescending"? Also will rewrite the section so it's a little more clear. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 02:11, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
Either one should be good. ATC.Talk 14:41, 11 November 2009 (UTC)
The Naked Brothers Band: The Movie
I will be glad to look at it again, but it will take me a few a days. DO you want the comments on the talk page? Ruhrfisch><>°° 22:57, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
Actually, that's a better idea, since it actually belongs on the article's talk page. Thanx and hope to view your comments in a few days! I'll put the talk page on my watchlist. ATC.Talk 02:32, 20 November 2009 (UTC)
Should get to this in the next 24 hours or so. Ruhrfisch><>°° 05:02, 22 November 2009 (UTC)
I replied on the article's talk page, so that the comments are all together. Thanks, Ruhrfisch><>°° 03:52, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
Signing off
HI ATC!
I left a long message here, but wanted to leave a more personal message here. Starting tomorrow I'll be really busy at work for the next two weeks, so I won't have time to work on the article for a few weeks, (unless a simple edit or two). I've run through the entire article and done the best I can. I still think there might be a few content issues, but let's see what happens from here. Thanks for being patient! I told you I'm not good at being ruthless, but essentially the changes that were needed required sentence by sentence changes. You've held off from editing which helped me get done, for which I'm grateful. My advice to you is to work on some other articles for now, and freeze this as is, unless a reviewer asks for a specific change. I'll keep it watched, and if you need immediate help let me know, and I'll respond time permitting. Take care and happy editing. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 17:15, 30 November 2009 (UTC)
CE request
Hi, noticed your name on the GOCE participants list, would you be interested in copy-editing "The Chinese Restaurant", which is currently at FAC? Thank you.--Music26/11 16:29, 3 December 2009 (UTC)
Thank you for your ce help, I'm sorry I undid most of your edits, but I did not like the format as it creates stubby paragraphs. As for your comments, you were right; it was the show's sixteenth episode overall, the article had 17th, but that is now fixed. Second of all, it is my preference that the image has such a long caption, and since I haven't gotten any negative comments about it at FAc, I'll let it be for now. Thank you.--Music26/11 05:41, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi again, you did some nice work on the article, I wondered if you wouldn't mind to take a look at "The Ex-Girlfriend" as well. Please do not divide the sections in to sub-sections, because I prefer it like it is now. Thanks.--Music26/11 17:05, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi, don't mean to rush you, but it's been a while. Thnx.--Music26/11 15:28, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
I have nominated The Valley Girl Show, an article that you created, for deletion. I do not think that this article satisfies Wikipedia's criteria for inclusion, and have explained why at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/The Valley Girl Show. Your opinions on the matter are welcome at that same discussion page; also, you are welcome to edit the article to address these concerns. Thank you for your time.Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. ttonyb (talk) 16:56, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Copy-edit request
Hey, I see that you're interested in copy-editing television-related articles. I recently put Supernatural (season 2) up for FAC, but I removed the nomination because some editor said it needed copy-editing. Do you mind copy-editing it, if you get the chance? I would really appreciate it. Thanks. :) Ωphois 23:39, 5 December 2009 (UTC)
Awesome! Thanks. Ωphois 21:31, 7 December 2009 (UTC)
What should be removed? Ωphois 22:12, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I saw that you changed one of the sentences to "Because all of the scenes could not be shot in the studio, they were instead filmed on location." To meet, this implies that every scene was filmed on location, which isn't the case. Ωphois 22:48, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
The general/specific was used in order to make it easier to use the book source. The general source is the book itself (with the entire reference), while specific pages are cited in the specific section. As for book sources, that's the only book source available on the season. Ωphois 22:54, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
And the revision for the sentence still seems awkward to me. It says "the scenes", implying all the scenes, but then mentions other scenes. Ωphois 22:58, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
In the studio means on sound stages. Though this does not only apply to internal scenes, as the finale's climax was filmed on a graveyard set on a sound stage. Ωphois 23:05, 8 December 2009 (UTC)
For the casting section, the reason I had it before writing was to introduce the actors and characters. That way, no explanations are required in the subsequent sections. Ωphois 21:02, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
What I was referring to was that you had switched its position with Writing, so that Writing is first in the Production section. IMO, having Casting first allows the introduction of actors/characters before the writing and filming, so that they don't have to be explained again. Ωphois 23:25, 10 December 2009 (UTC)
Here is the nomination. I copy-edited the article myself after the nomination, so it is a bit different. However, one of the editors who opposed still wasn't satisfied with the current version and recommended that I contact you. Ωphois 03:07, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Since Sasata (one of the opposing editors) recommended you, if you believe that it is up to FA standards, do you mind telling him so? Ωphois 03:10, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean. Ωphois 03:28, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
As for Sasata, he had said to use a copy-editor, as doing so would catch mistakes that I myself hadn't caught. Since he recommended you, your approval of the article would probably make him take another thorough look at it. Ωphois 03:31, 12 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm still waiting for one of the original opposers to look over the season 2 article before I renominate. In the meantime, do you mind looking over What Is and What Should Never Be (Supernatural)? You can skip the plot section for now, as I'm gonna rewrite/expand it soon. Thanks. Ωphois 20:35, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Sure, I will. I'm logging off now, but will look at it tomorrow. ATC.Talk 02:30, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
She is one of the actresses on the FNL series. Ωphois 23:09, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I know. Just haven't gotten around to formatting them, lol. Ωphois 23:20, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
If you do FAC's, do you mind reviewing it here? Either way, thanks again for your help. Ωphois 16:12, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Looks good to me! ATC.Talk 02:14, 23 December 2009 (UTC)
Wikibreak
Hi ATC! Just thought I'd let you know that I'll be mostly gone until the beginning of January. If necessary might do some light editing in the next week, but after that will be offline for about 10 days. Enjoy the holidays!! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 16:55, 16 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanx you too!! And will talk to you in 2010. ATC.Talk 02:05, 17 December 2009 (UTC)
Thinking in Pictures: My Life with Autism
Hey, I saw you were looking to write Thinking in Pictures: My Life with Autism, I was looking for sources and didn't come up with much, but I found quite a bit on Animals in Translation, and started that article. Some of the references mention Thinking in Pictures if you want to use them. Cheers. --kelapstick (talk) 18:14, 18 December 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, I'm actually starting to read it and it's really interesting. I'll look at the references on her other book then, I didn't even know that any of Temple Grandin's books were on Wikipedia. Do you mind working with me to develop the article to be decently written. I'll start the article though. ATC.Talk 19:34, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I think that Animals in Translation is the first one, in the Bibliography section on her article I added a link to it, and I don't recall seeing any other books linked. Let me know when you start Thinking in Pictures (we have it, but I haven`t read it yet), and I will give you a hand with it if I can. Cheers, and have a great weekend.--kelapstick (talk) 19:47, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanx you too, and enjoy the holidays! ATC.Talk 19:52, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I will work on it, but will busy over the holidays but I will work on it hopefully during then, and if not, right after the holidays. ATC.Talk 22:43, 19 December 2009 (UTC)
I will likely be off and on busy as the holidays progress, depending on what is going on around the office. I don't get much editing done on the weekends and holidays, but I will keep User:ATC/Thinking in Pictures on my watchlist so I can seen when you make the red link blue, if that's where you want to start it. --kelapstick (talk) 17:08, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Okay great, I will start that way, but I probably wont start much, if not at all, during the break, since I'll be on vacation. ATC.Talk 17:47, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Sounds good, have a good holiday season! --kelapstick (talk) 18:17, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanx you too! ATC.Talk 18:24, 22 December 2009 (UTC)
FAC
Hi ATC!
Don't know whether you have this watchlisted, but it looks as though ref 25 should be fixed to be consistent with the others. Enjoy your holidays!! Truthkeeper88 (talk) 20:09, 20 December 2009 (UTC)
Thanx! I've replied. :) ATC.Talk 02:36, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
Bobby Newman
I'm afraid I won't have much time to help with Bobby Newman. There are a lot of autism researchers, and I'm afraid that Newman is not one that I know well. Eubulides (talk) 01:24, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Hi there ATC, please see Wikipedia:Other stuff exists. The fact that one article on a similar subject exists doesn't mean that other, similar articles get a free pass. Lankiveil(speak to me) 05:12, 26 December 2009 (UTC).
Eh, it was deleted, huh? Typical wiki b.s. I suggest you request that the closing admin userify the article for you, and you add cites as more become available, and then it can possibly be moved back to the main space.-Milowent (talk) 05:57, 26 December 2009 (UTC)
Userified as requested, at User:ATC/Sandbox/The Valley Girl Show. It's traditional to list at DRV before moving the article back into the mainspace, but if you want me to have a look before then to make sure it's ready, I'll be happy to oblige. Cheers, Lankiveil(speak to me) 12:22, 29 December 2009 (UTC).
Another request
Hey. I have pretty much completed another article that I want to submit for FA or GA in the future. Do you mind copy-editing User:Ophois/Fresh Blood when you get the chance? No need to rush, so feel free to take your time. Thanks. Ωphois 05:43, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
I'm not doing much on Wiki until after the holidays, but I'll definately copyedit it in 2010! ATC.Talk<
Sounds good, thanks! Ωphois 19:59, 29 December 2009 (UTC)
This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
