685:
weird around the edges and they're not political, so I'm wondering if pulling out one or two countries would be better (also open to say, political groupings like the EU). For Media and Music, those do some broad categories that could be split, assuming there are no very half-half director actors or similar. Lee
Vilenski's split on Association football seems sound, might have to take a closer look at stadiums. On the broad question of numbers, I generally look at it with an eye for somewhere between 20/25 (where it forms a clear paragraph-length chunk that shows it is a topic with clear work) and around 200 (where, depending on the length of individual entries, the block starts to get longer than laptop screen lengths).
2614:
whether the reviewers broadly agree, disagree, or cover separate ground altogether are all factors that determine this. When there is a fairly large number of relatively lengthy reviews that all largely agree on the main points, summarizing by theme is likely to be the best approach. Conversely, a low number of relatively brief reviews that focus on different aspects may be better summarized separately in the body (though the much briefer summary in the
194:
2695:
most of the source review, and just started on the prose review. I've found a lot of issues with prose as well but I'm not sure if that is just me being overly nitpicky. I'm also a little bit unsure of how to feel about the amount of technical information there is in the article. I don't know if this is the standard amount of technical info in a military article or if it needs to be toned down a bit here.
857:(ec) The EU doesn't include Switzerland, Norway, the UK, and some Balkan and eastern European countries, though that list will probably change over the next few years. I think geographical categories make more sense than political ones, as they are more stable. No strong opinion on UK/Ireland vs. continental Europe or Western vs. Eastern Europe, but I suspect the former is going to be easier to manage.
106:
152:
1887:
and Iâm really glad the coordinator suggested I got more experience first as I did need it. My proposal would be requiring people who are entering the GARC to have reviewed at least 5 GAs beforehand. 5 is kind of a random number so if anyone has other suggestions please let me know but I do feel implementing some form of restrictions may help with the future of GARCs.
171:
2734:
perhaps alert the IP of this if you do so. On technical information, it is best if the article is as accessible as possible, but it is not a problem for the GACR if some parts remain technical so long as it is relevant, and it's not that long an article. Perhaps look to make sure the lead is not technical.
2336:. I am not very familiar with FL, but looking at it, I think the same issues we have been discussing here will prevent it from passing. Please gain some more experience with Knowledge (XXG) and improve your writing skills before you review or nominate articles at FAC/FLC/GAN. I can see you are active in
2829:
opened the review at 17:15, and passed the article at 17:33, leaving not a single comment as to what was checked and what was found. If we accept a simple "passed" without any commentary, especially in a quick pass after less than a third of an hour to read and digest and check a substantial article,
2792:
I have in fact witnessed IPs not only nominate articles, but get them through the process successfully. It's very rare but I see no reason we should forbid it so long as we allow IP editing. IPs may change frequently but for most people they will consistently locate to the same area which makes it at
2117:
I agree that the process currently compromises on review quality. Still, we need more people reviewing, and this is a good incentive to try a first review. If they've got a mentor who will ensure a standard of quality, as an exception to the requirements, then I don't see why they should be excluded.
958:
If someone created an article on something Turkey (nation) related and it's placed in either Europe or Asia, the article will be reviewed swiftly either way. On the other hand, as someone *not* interested in
English/Irish/Isle related articles, I would be happy to more easily find the other articles.
143:
in general. To ask a question or start a discussion about the good article nomination process, click the Add topic link above. Please check and see if your question may already be answered; click the link to the
Frequently asked questions below or search the Archives below. If you are here to discuss
806:
On reflection, I'm not sure my concern about EU being more clear-cut is relevant anyway, since GAN doesn't really end up having acrimonious disputes about which categories ought to exist and what ought to be in them, at least not as far as I've seen. I do still prefer "British Isles" vs "Continental
2733:
I don't see any problems with the review, the nominator seems responsive to your questions and suggestions. If the sources are out of place you could mention that, it is easy enough to duplicate them if needed. If you're feeling overly nitpicky, you can make minor spelling/grammar changes yourself,
2694:
a couple weeks ago and I honestly just need a fresh set of eyes here. So far my review has been a lot of back and forth between me and the nominator. My biggest concern here is that some of the citations aren't placed by the information they support which makes source reviweing very hard. I've done
1806:
To TheNuggeteer, I want to say I really hope you don't take this badly; I'm only saying that I believe you need to learn more about the GAN/article-writing process first before taking on a role like this. I also think for the benefit of GARC, proposed coordinators should have greater scrutiny (with
1610:
It seems like editors did not want to split along
Eastern/Western Europe and instead split out the countries of Britain, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland, Ireland, and smaller surrounding islands into their own category. What name should this category use? Some suggestions included: "Great Britain
1504:
After skimming through the list, I think an "other celebrities" category would be quite small. I think the least amount of overlap is to split off director from the others above, and then place biographies in the category that the person is most known for. If there is doubt, we can discuss it here.
1314:
Ah, my read is that we were only talking about geographical splits of "European history" not "historical figures". Given the disparities in coverage of global figures, going by date is probably easier to manage without further splits. Whether that's the most important criterion, I don't know that I
1178:
There was no objection to splitting "Road infrastructure: Midwestern United States" and "Performers, groups, composers, and other music-related people" in the way proposed above. I think this split can happen, and any help would be appreciated to make this split. If someone objects to splitting the
2498:
In some GANs (looking at books, in particular), the
Reception sections are written with dedicated paragraphs summarizing each reviewer in isolation, often with heavy quoting, and little to no attempt to connect themes with other reviews. Sometimes this is by necessity, say, if there are only three
1944:
I agree with that. I think any combination of five successful GANs and GA reviews (that were not quickfails; e.g. 2 successful nominations and 3 well-done reviews) is a reasonable standard to participate, so long as there aren't any other pressing issues. Imo coordinators should also scrutinize at
1929:
I wouldnât have an issue with this either however I do think they should demonstrate they know how to do a review which I donât know how else that could be demonstrated unless theyâve done a review in the past. We could also say either reviewed or nominated 5 GAs that way people who havenât done a
1886:
This may not be the best place to put this but since I was tagged here and itâs somewhat related to the topic I think it may be a good idea to put some restrictions in place at GARC to avoid newer editors from getting overwhelmed. When I first applied to be apart of the GARC I had only done 3 GARs
973:
I agree that "British Isles" by itself is a problematic name, especially to the Irish community. Some options could be "British Isles: England, Wales, Scotland, Northern
Ireland and Republic of Ireland" or "England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland and Republic of Ireland". EU is not a great idea
2548:
I agree that this needs more attention, and I consider an unorganized assortment of opinions and quotes to fail the GA criteria. The majority of the time when reviewing an article about some piece of media, I have to ask the nominator to fix the reception section because it's a list of quotes. In
2613:
The best way to summarize the critical reception will vary from case to case. There are several dimensions to this. The number of reviews, the length of each individual review, the relative prominence of each reviewer in the relevant field, the type of work (e.g. fiction versus non-fiction), and
2594:
I agree that quotes should be used sparingly in reception sections and overuse of quotes in a reception section should be considered both an issue of copyright and poor prose. Even if there are few quotes, reception sections should also be somewhat organized or they risk not being clear (e.g. by
1693:
should step down from being a coordinator for the time being (at least until he is able to demonstrate better understanding of the GAN process). I think there is a lot of evidence to suggest he needs additional experience with
Knowledge (XXG) and the GAN process to become a coordinator for GARC.
684:
We've had some discussion on how to split historical/royal biographies and events before, but haven't found something that's convenient. Proposed split of
Midwestern United States sounds practical and within current practice. For the proposed split of political figures, continental divisions get
2657:
Summarizing a review that the reader is not able to access is helpful. It may not be the optimal approach, but it provides information they did not have and could not get on their own. There are of course better and worse ways of summarizing individual reviews, where a high reliance on verbatim
2643:
In the case of too-few-reviews, I don't think summarizing each review in depth offers any actual illumination for the reader. In an example with three reviews, summarized in depth and relying on quotes, it reads like book back cover blurbs (advertisements) or a review aggregator. I wouldn't say
1425:
If a sub-heading was used under
European history, the font would not be smaller than the headings we currently use, as the GA headings are already the smallest allowed. Also, I think it would be the only categories in GA with sub-categories. I would prefer "European history: United Kingdom and
742:
narrower scope than "European political figures": for example, the former would arguably only include
British political figures who were active between 1973 and 2020, whereas the latter would presumably include any British political figures ever. I can think of edge-cases for both options (are
1527:
Consensus seemed to be to put stadiums into "Association football events, matches, and concepts". There are still some stadiums listed in "Stadiums, public parks, and amusements". Should the status quo remain, where articles are listed in two different places, or should the stadiums be listed
2064:
In terms of my approach to GARC, I think to make them work at increasing the number of reviews, they should be frequent. I don't think newer reviewers should be excluded, as long as they are mentored in some way, i e. with a second pair of eyes looking over the review, which helps them with
1901:
Although it's not common, there are people who don't write much content but still have a good grasp of how to evaluate the GA criteria and review an article. I would have no issue with someone putting their first ever GAN up at GARC if they're already proven themselves a capable reviewer.
959:
The goal of these categories shouldnât be to find perfect ontologies but to make sure more niche content doesnât get drowned among the most popular candidates. I frequently check Business Economics, and Society related categories since my topics of interest frequently fit both. ~ đŚ
974:
because the countries in the EU are constantly changing, while the borders of Europe are pretty static. Also, EU politicians in the news are often still identified from the country they are from, and involved in that country's politics before, during and after being part of the EU.
2628:
exist to some extent in tension with each other and we have to exercise judgment in finding an appropriate compromise approach that does not go too far in one direction or the other. Reasonable people can disagree about the best course of action in any particular case.
540:
While going through the list of good articles, I noticed that there were some categories that are quite large. As more articles get promoted, some of these categories might benefit by being split up. This will help readers navigate these pages to find good articles.
2874:
I think we should give them a chance to respond, it doesn't have to be immediately delisted. The 40/50 people who view the page a day probably aren't going to have their experience changed much, and the article is certainly good given the nominator is Chiswick Chap.
1141:
After reading the above, I think there are some areas of consensus and some areas where additional comments might be helpful. I have split the discussions into level 3 headings for organisation purposes. Comments on all the discussions would be appreciated.
636:
Would editors be OK with initiating these splits? Should these names be used, or other ones? Should 300 be the target number in each category, or should another maximum number be used? Are the suggested divisions the best places to split these categories?
652:
imo, European history being separated into "British Isles" and "Continental Europe" will probably be easier than Eastern/Western. The borders of what is east and west are arguable. Whether something is in the British Isles or not is more clear-cut. --
2618:
might still be best presented thematically). I have used both approaches in different articles based on what seemed the most fitting to me in each case. We must remember that summarizing different reviewers' viewpoints collectively can also result in
670:
The main reason is that there is quite a bit of overlap between the seasons and events. These tend to be about the matches that the teams have had. Teams and stadium articles are much more higher level concepts and would fit neatly into one section.
1440:
Plenty of GA categories with sub-categories, off the top of my head the biggest offender is Biology. Using an explicit "other" category can work, although it does slightly complicate the simple hierarchical structure that can aid machine analysis.
2060:
I would like to comment on TheNuggeteer's reviews later, but in the meantime, would I be able to take over the coordinator position? I don't think I'm an exceptional reviewer by any means and don't have any GAs, but I have done a fair amount of
1543:
regardless of which category they're put in (i'd probably prefer putting them in with parks &c. but if there was consensus for putting them in with football articles then so be it), it should be consistent and they should all be together.
2533:
What is our general working expectation for GANs? Is it sufficient for GAN breadth and writing quality to plop summaries of each review without connection, or are editors expected to connect the reviews for a general audience when available?
1335:
For various categories, there was discussion on how Europe should be defined for the interest of categories. What countries should be included in a "Europe" category? Should a list of EU countries be used instead? For categories where the
2034:
Directed by VĂŠras Fawaz, a personal friend of Klein, the music video for "Europapa" was premiered live on De Avondshow met Arjen Lubach at 16:45 CET, followed by a release on the Eurovision Song Contest channel on YouTube ten minutes
1790:
advising him that he would need additional experience reviewing articles before participating in the GARC process. However, TheNuggeteer's GA review circles have included editors with dramatically less experience, which you can see
3081:
article. Purely as a matter of principle, given that he passed it with next to no comments and that he is (by his own admission) a new reviewer, I think someone more experienced should give this a once over just to be on the safe
1963:
I would also be happy with this however I do agree that coordinators having to look over others reviews may add to the workload. I think itâs fair to just look over the users talk page to see if any concerns have been brought up.
1213:
I don't think there's anything wrong with considering splits at 200, if there is a logical division available, but perhaps we could make 300 the hard line. (Maybe the bot could be made to auto-post here to remind us to split?)
611:: (Political figures: North America) (Political figures: Europe) (Political figures: other). If others want it, we can have each region listed (South America, Africa, Asia, Oceania) though this might create small categories.
1278:
While the higher the number of articles the more a split becomes a good idea, I think we should consider as low as 200 if there are logical categories we can create. That would have to be evaluated on a case by case basis.
1157:
I have completed the split for the music articles. There will probably need to be another discussion to split the biographies, but I think that should be initiated once the concerns below have been resolved and acted upon.
1945:
least one of these to make sure they're good, but I also don't want to force volunteers to do more work if it's just going to create a backlog (it looks to me that both coordinators aren't as active as they used to be). ~
1024:
Oh indeed. I have no particular love for "British Isles" as the name of the category; my intent was simply to suggest that the continental divide is probably an easier and more relevant one to use than eastern/western. --
2445:
Way out of line. Surely there are better ways to motivate them to contribute more positively. This is clearly an enthusiastic editor doing their best to improve Knowledge (XXG), and these comments just turn editors away.
1467:
Some biographies have overlap between the proposed split to "Actors, models, performers, and celebrities" and "Directors". Should this split continue like this, or should this be split another way (or not split at all)?
783:
There's certainly a grey area as to where the line is drawn between "Political figures" and "Historical figures: politicians", but for what it's worth I see a few nineteenth century figures in the former category (e.g.
2644:
that's any greater breadth of prose or good writing than a single sentence for each. I haven't seen an example (including my own older GAs on books) in which a paragraph for each reviewer is a helpful review approach.
2102:
is a good program for mentoring new users. I think the process currently compromises on review quality, which is something that this project was setup to try and avoid. Adding requirements should hopefully solve this.
2623:
by making stronger or broader claims than is justified by the overall contents of all relevant sources. For this reason, I favour a comparatively conservative approach to doing so. This is an area where our different
2083:
Of course! Just as the others accept, I honestly don't want to be a coord anymore (hope the other coords don't take it badly). You have multitudes of experience reviewing GAN's, so you seem like a good candidate.
2252:, despite still having three unfinished reviews from the last few weeks. Between this, their noms, and their previous reviews, I don't believe this user is ready to participate in the GAN process quite yet.
2515:
1120:
I'm a bit late to the discussion, but I'd be in favor of dividing up the general rail transport category (213 articles). I think we could add categories for rail accidents and incidents plus rapid transit.
1800:
459:
2776:
Creating a GAN is all talkpage editing, so there isn't a technical mechanism to prevent IP nominations. As for the specific article, it was mostly written by an IP, so it might be the same individual.
1782:
As coordinator, his circles have also had significantly less scrutiny than the ones organized by other coordinators. To provide one example of contrast, one coordinator previously left a message on @
3021:
It should be fixed now, I think, but I'm not 100% sure. I thought it might have been related to a mistake I'd made on the talk page, so I tried blanking it and then restoring the content correctly.
880:
724:
Agree with both Vacant0 and CMD that "EU" is a better term than "Europe". Again, seems more clear cut. Unless someone can come up with some hypothetical edge cases that seem messier that way? --
2580:
quote-plopping, but I see enough people saying things like "any suitably sourced and reasonably complete article can be a GA" that I wonder if requiring "weaving" is overly ambitious for GA. --
909:
60:
2821:
had been opened for review and passed very quickly, which is unusual given that source checking is required these days and it takes time to read an entire article and check it for all the
2762:
I looked into this and apperantly unregistered users can nominate articles for GAs. I also was not aware that drive by noms were a thing/aren't allowed until after I started my review.
667:
Id probably change the split to Association football teams, events, and concepts: (Association football teams and stadiums) (Association football seasons, events, matches, and concepts)
2845:
They have not shown anywhere whether the article actually meets the six GA criteria. If the reviewer does not respond, the article should be delisted and put up for a review again.
1299:
Based on my reading of the discussion above, I think editors are more favourable to splitting "Historical figures: other" by geographic location, not time period. Is this accurate?
608:
544:
Listed below are my suggestions for splitting some categories. The goal was for each categories to have under 300 articles, an arbitrary number I picked because most categories at
1762:
560:
330:
326:
322:
318:
314:
310:
306:
302:
298:
294:
290:
286:
282:
278:
274:
270:
266:
262:
258:
254:
250:
246:
242:
2217:
which should probably be deleted. I don't think they have picked up any reviews since this was brought up here so I'm unsure if there remains an issue of needing to slow down.
1355:
On splitting Europe, there isn't a need to label the rest of Europe something else. We can put the British Isles (and other future splits) as a subheader of the Europe header.
556:) because I could not think of a place to split them that would make sense with the other categories in their grouping. Each suggested category is listed in separate brackets.
443:
439:
435:
431:
427:
423:
238:
234:
230:
226:
222:
218:
214:
210:
206:
158:
2978:
Now passed again with an empty review form with a whole 191 characters of brief questions for the nominator (including the comment delimeters) left as hidden comments in
46:
988:
A geographical option is "Great Britain and Ireland"; "United Kingdom and Eire" could work as well, with "Continental Europe" probably the simplest option for the rest.
417:
413:
409:
405:
2186:
Bumping this, which still needs to be addressed. It's been said above that TheNuggeteer probably needs to hold off on reviewing for a while and take GAN more slowly.
618:
614:
553:
2019:
1583:
1568:
Agree, I think it's weird to put them in with sports and not public places, but I don't edit this kind of article so feel free to disregard my opinion on this. --
2658:
quotes tends towards the worse and writing about the overarching ideas in one's own words tends towards the better. The underlying problem is that we rarely have
2004:
I don't like saying this, but I don't think the editor should be reviewing GAs, and I have doubts about at least one of their articles that were promoted to GA.
2329:
1833:
But anyway, I don't feel like those quickfailed noms are recent (for me), and after, I have eight other successful reviews and 2 GAs, so I probably don't know.
1792:
2511:. In my experience, this also reduces heavy quoting, which pushes the boundaries of fair use paraphrase, even when attributed. It also requires more effort.
1340:
are separated from other European nations, what should the other European countries be referred to: Continental Europe, Mainland Europe, or something else?
95:
2499:
reviewers and there is little connection to the other reviews. But most often there are plenty of reviews and opportunities to engage with the guidance in
2500:
575:: (Historical figures: pre-1900s miscellaneous), (Historical figures: 1900s and 2000s miscellaneous). Another option is to separate by geographic location
769:, I thought of Eden's case (not him specifically, but that kind of person), but isn't he supposed to be in "Historical figures - politicians" anyway? --
2337:
630:
626:
596:
399:
395:
391:
387:
383:
379:
375:
747:, who retired from active politics before Britain joined the EU, but lived for nearly 30 years after, an EU political figure? What about someone like
751:, who was still in the House of Lords until he died in 1977, but was essentially politically irrelevant after he resigned as prime minister in 1957?)
569:: (Historical figures: pre-1900s politicians) (Historical figures: 1900s and 2000s politicians). Another option is to separate by geograhpic location.
2620:
371:
367:
363:
359:
355:
351:
347:
343:
339:
1010:
If using Ăire, make sure to write it as I have. Also, I recommend not using the term 'British Isles': Great Britain and Ireland will offend no one
453:
449:
74:
2818:
2386:
2748:
I wasn't aware that we allow GA nominations from unregistered users. How can their contributions be measured to ensure they're not 'drive by?
88:
2018:
I think I have to agree. I have seen a marked improvement in their quality of reviews, but I did spend some time co-reviewing a few articles
1626:
Great Britain and Ireland is probably the most neutral (as opposed to "British Isles") and more COMMONNAME-y than "United Kingdom and Ăire".
617:: (Association football teams, seasons, and stadiums) (Association football events, matches, and concepts). Some stadiums are also listed in
136:
53:
2286:. If you don't care so much about that, you can just comment that you'll be taking over per this conversation, and add comments from there.
1796:
1198:
In the above, I proposed splits for categories over 300 articles. Another editor suggested 200. What is the ideal number in each category?
1001:
870:
2625:
2099:
581:: (Eastern European history) (Western European history). Other option is (British Isles and Irish history) and (Mainland-European history)
67:
699:
I'd support the Historical figures and Political figures splits and would prefer both of them to be grouped by location (NA, Eu, Other).
2249:
997:
866:
3094:
2394:
1681:'s talk page at first, but having read through it, I think it should be posted somewhere with greater visibility. I may be pinging @
590:
584:
578:
572:
566:
549:
39:
756:
2507:
to understand the holistic reception. The latter, to me, is the minimum quality bar for the "well-written" (1a) and "breadth" (3a)
926:
Precisely the confusion I intended to avoid by suggesting "EU" instead. But if we simply accept that placing a relevant article in
177:
3026:
2969:
2923:
1772:
835:
I might go through the list and make sure people are in the correct spots. If the split happens, I can do this at the same time.
821:
The line per the existing hidden notes is BLP, living people go into Political figures, dead people go into Historical figures.
602:
2889:
I've said that it should be delisted if they do not respond. The reviewer clearly responded now, so it should not be delisted.
2604:
2549:
this case, I usually consider it a criterion 2 failure in relation to copyright and failing to properly paraphrase the source.
2436:
2040:
I like TheNuggeteer, and honestly think they've done good work with GACR, but I don't think they're able to evaluate 1a of the
1954:
1875:
1816:
789:
879:
My bad, I did not mean the European Union, but instead Europe as a whole. This would mean including countries from this list:
2798:
2214:
1284:
1126:
2996:...and unclosed and restored to a blank newly-started review page again with the edit summary "Fixing formatting problem". â
2659:
3121:
2954:
2904:
2860:
2390:
2029:
I think that after "a personal friend of Klein", the comma should be a dot instead, and the next word will be capitalized.
1408:
1266:
898:
714:
2767:
2723:
2705:
2236:
1969:
1935:
1892:
1787:
1219:
766:
752:
2663:
1746:
3022:
2965:
2934:
2919:
2880:
2826:
2345:
2301:
2222:
2123:
2070:
2049:
525:
2231:
Iâm willing to review the TNF article as itâs in my scope of interest. Whatâs the protocol for taking over a review?
1713:
1707:
797:
2340:, maybe try to get someone to work there on articles and then co-nominate them when you both think they're ready?
140:
32:
2794:
2565:
2523:
2519:
2268:
2202:
2175:
1918:
1731:
1280:
1122:
629:
that have their own categories, even with only one entry, while multiple episodes of a series will be listed in
502:
491:
480:
469:
144:
concerns with a specific review, please consider discussing things with the reviewer first before posting here.
3040:
3001:
2987:
2595:
academic/non-academic reviewers, by views on certain aspects of the book, or by positive/negative reviewers) ~
1719:
1685:
too many times today now, but I'll do so as a courtesy since GARC is also something you've primarily organized.
508:
2979:
2781:
2763:
2739:
2719:
2279:
2232:
2159:, you are also simultaneously reviewing five different GANs right now, four of which you have not finished.
2141:
2108:
1993:
1985:
1965:
1931:
1888:
1783:
1591:
1446:
1360:
1215:
1095:
1060:
993:
949:
917:
862:
826:
690:
17:
2727:
105:
3089:
3063:
2876:
2469:
2461:
2380:
2341:
2315:
2297:
2218:
2119:
2089:
2080:
2066:
2045:
2022:
1848:
1838:
785:
497:
1988:: I really like this idea. I will add requirements for users wanting to participate and see how it goes.
563:: (Road infrastructure: Michigan highways) (Road infrastructure: Other Midwestern United States highways)
2835:
2753:
1768:
1701:
1655:
1090:
is definitely not true. The concept of Europe has historically crept east, as it continues to do today.
1074:
1044:
1015:
793:
114:
2715:
2711:
2671:
2667:
2634:
2630:
2585:
2550:
2527:
2354:
i have to second this - please don't rush into things, and please listen to other editors' feedback.
2293:
2253:
2187:
2160:
1903:
1573:
1488:
1320:
1030:
935:
812:
774:
729:
658:
475:
506:
486:
3036:
2997:
2983:
2699:
2691:
2600:
2432:
2416:
2367:
1950:
1871:
1812:
1639:
1557:
1382:
1240:
964:
473:
3126:
3100:
3044:
3030:
3005:
2991:
2973:
2959:
2927:
2909:
2884:
2865:
2839:
2802:
2785:
2771:
2757:
2743:
2675:
2652:
2638:
2608:
2589:
2571:
2542:
2504:
2473:
2451:
2440:
2422:
2398:
2373:
2349:
2319:
2305:
2274:
2240:
2226:
2208:
2181:
2145:
2127:
2112:
2093:
2074:
2053:
2013:
1997:
1973:
1958:
1939:
1924:
1896:
1879:
1842:
1820:
1659:
1645:
1620:
1595:
1577:
1563:
1537:
1514:
1492:
1477:
1450:
1435:
1413:
1388:
1364:
1349:
1324:
1308:
1288:
1271:
1246:
1222:
1207:
1188:
1167:
1151:
1130:
1099:
1078:
1064:
1048:
1034:
1019:
1005:
983:
968:
953:
939:
921:
903:
874:
844:
830:
816:
801:
778:
760:
733:
719:
694:
679:
662:
646:
2777:
2735:
2137:
2104:
1989:
1682:
1674:
1587:
1483:
What's "actors, models, performers, directors" and "other celebrities" look like? Useful, or? --
1442:
1420:
1356:
1091:
1056:
989:
945:
913:
858:
822:
686:
2822:
2283:
495:
3117:
3084:
2950:
2900:
2856:
2466:
2325:
2312:
2289:
2245:
2156:
2086:
2025:
1835:
1690:
1689:
Hi there, I don't want to come off as discourteous, but I have concerns that make me believe @
1404:
1262:
894:
738:
I don't have a strong opinion on which is better, but "EU political figures" is potentially a
710:
673:
2615:
2508:
2041:
3072:
2831:
2749:
2009:
1847:
Your more recent nominations don't inspire much confidence in me either. Your nomination of
1651:
1070:
1040:
1011:
930:
category is fine, I think we can just choose not to have the problem in the first place. --
504:
493:
482:
471:
193:
621:, so I am not sure if the community wants to keep these separated or find another solution.
3016:
nomination is malformed -- Status indicates review has started but there is no review page
2581:
1616:
1584:
Knowledge (XXG):Good articles/Art and architecture#Architecture â Forts and fortifications
1569:
1533:
1510:
1499:
1484:
1473:
1431:
1345:
1316:
1304:
1203:
1184:
1163:
1147:
1026:
979:
931:
840:
808:
770:
725:
654:
642:
2333:
545:
484:
180:
discussions and keep related topics together, several other GA talk pages redirect here.
2646:
2596:
2536:
2428:
2406:
2357:
1946:
1867:
1827:
1808:
1629:
1547:
1372:
1230:
960:
1830:
Hmm, seems like a good option, since I could actually use more time to make more GA's.
3078:
2282:, if you would like to get credit for the review, you can follow the instructions at
1678:
1337:
744:
2516:
The Oxford Guide to the Book of Common Prayer: A Worldwide Survey#Critical reception
1426:
Ireland" and "European history: other" over using subheadings for European history.
587:: (Monarchs: Europe), (Monarchs: other). Another option is to separate by timeframe.
3107:
2940:
2890:
2846:
1856:
1394:
1252:
884:
748:
700:
605:: (Duos, trios, and groups) (Performers, composers, and other music-related people)
170:
743:
Turkish and/or Russian politicians European political figures vs. is someone like
2005:
1930:
review but have nominated enough GAs to show they understand could participate.
1723:
151:
2939:
I've rollbacked everything, so you should be able to continue your review now.
792:. Of course, it may be the case that they ought to be recategorised entirely.
1612:
1529:
1506:
1469:
1427:
1341:
1300:
1199:
1180:
1159:
1143:
975:
836:
638:
2982:. No evidence of source review. Is that supposed to be considered adequate? â
1697:
Many of his recent GANs have had significant concerns brought up by editors:
1761:
were all speedily deleted after Dmries brought up concerns with his reviews
1716:(July 8) â quickfailed for failing to meet the minimum level of contribution
633:. How many episodes should be the minimum for a category in this section?
2447:
1807:
clear minimum requirements) in the future, before being added. ~
2918:
Yup, I did that by accident, very sorry! Any way I can undo it?
2296:
comment above before continuing to nominate or review articles?
1582:
Either way, once grouped a redirect can be put in place like at
2662:
about what the reviews say, but have to rely on the reviews as
1704:(June 27) â quickfailed for being far outside the GAN standards
593:: (Royalty and nobility: Europe), (Royalty and nobility: other)
2213:
I can leave comments on these to finish these reviews, except
1710:(July 5) â quickfailed for being far outside the GAN standards
509:
498:
487:
476:
187:
165:
146:
1650:
I agree that 'Great Britain and Ireland' is the most neutral
944:"British Isles" will of course get us into other problems :)
603:
Performers, groups, composers, and other music-related people
548:
are below that number. I chose not to split some categories (
1754:
1736:
I don't think you have a grasp of what is required for a GA.
881:
List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Europe
104:
2065:
understanding what they should be looking for in a review.
1528:
together? If listed together, where should they be listed?
599:: (Actors, models, performers, and celebrities) (Directors)
910:
List of sovereign states and dependent territories in Asia
2494:
1a and 3a in Reception sections with isolated reviewers
2133:
1863:
1860:
1852:
1758:
1750:
122:
2098:
I think requiring experience in GARC is for the best.
1463:
Actors, directors, models, performers, and celebrities
597:
Actors, directors, models, performers, and celebrities
2385:
There's really no helping this person; they may have
1728:
probably shouldn't be submitting and reviewing for GA
2460:
I already work with Hurricanehink to hopefully make
1795:(such as one editor with 153 edits). Most recently,
1668:Concerns about a new GA review circles coordinator
2793:least somewhat feasible to determine authorship.
1755:Talk:Philippines at the 1924 Summer Olympics/GA1
807:Europe" over Eastern/Western Europe, though. --
788:) â and at least one eighteenth-century figure,
615:Association football teams, events, and concepts
2686:Seeking second opinions on a review I'm doing.
2501:Knowledge (XXG):Copyediting reception sections
2330:List of Olympic medalists for the Philippines
561:Road infrastructure: Midwestern United States
519:This page has archives. Sections older than
8:
18:Knowledge (XXG) talk:What is a good article?
3035:So where is the required source analysis? â
2530:for combined paragraphs across reviewers.
1853:had to be reverted as a drive-by nomination
1799:after he failed to follow step four of the
1611:and Ireland" or "United Kingdom and Ăire".
1606:British Isles, Great Britain, Ireland, Ăire
908:Some countries on that list also appear on
2714:, currently seems to be using the account
2522:for separate paragraphs per reviewer, and
1174:Road infrastructure and music performers
3010:Yep, I was trying to fix this problem:
2514:For some examples of the variance, see
1179:above as described, please post below.
1088:the borders of Europe are pretty static
2819:Talk:Tolkien's Round World dilemma/GA1
2427:Please strike your personal attack. ~
2028:
1775:
1735:
1727:
619:Stadiums, public parks, and amusements
1055:That's one way to describe the Manx.
7:
2328:. I can see you have just nominated
1722:(July 8) â failed nomination where @
26:
2524:Sappho: A New Translation#Reception
2520:A History of English Food#Reception
2503:, weaving reviewers together for a
2250:Talk:1991 Hindu Kush earthquake/GA1
2132:I think that is fair, I have added
1776:may not meet community expectations
2324:That doesn't address the concerns
25:
1771:wrote on his talk page on July 1
1747:Talk:Giado concentration camp/GA1
523:may be automatically archived by
2690:I started a review for the page
192:
169:
159:Frequently asked questions (FAQ)
150:
2621:WP:Improper editorial synthesis
2310:Sure, already finished Harold.
1797:a circle had to be re-organized
1741:In addition to his GA reviews:
790:John Mathews (American pioneer)
567:Historical figures: politicians
3127:10:13, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
3101:01:54, 21 September 2024 (UTC)
3045:06:40, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
3031:06:35, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
3006:06:19, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
2992:04:59, 19 September 2024 (UTC)
2974:23:52, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2960:20:03, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2928:19:16, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2910:19:28, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2885:19:14, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2866:18:55, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2840:18:47, 18 September 2024 (UTC)
2803:21:06, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
2786:18:11, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2772:18:09, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2758:17:53, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2744:15:37, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2728:15:17, 10 September 2024 (UTC)
2676:16:52, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2653:16:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2528:How the Red Sun Rose#Reception
2474:12:12, 17 September 2024 (UTC)
2452:00:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
2441:20:37, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2423:16:16, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2399:16:10, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2374:13:39, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2350:13:36, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2320:11:51, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2306:09:21, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
2275:02:20, 14 September 2024 (UTC)
2241:15:46, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
2227:02:36, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
2215:Talk:Tumor necrosis factor/GA1
2209:02:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1660:10:01, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1646:17:22, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1621:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1596:02:43, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1578:20:04, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1564:17:34, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1538:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1515:22:38, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1493:20:02, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1478:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1451:02:40, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1436:01:58, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1414:20:19, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1389:17:33, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1365:17:26, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1350:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1325:20:01, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1309:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1289:21:02, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1272:20:18, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1247:20:14, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1223:20:13, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1208:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1194:Target number in each category
1189:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1168:22:35, 15 September 2024 (UTC)
1152:15:12, 13 September 2024 (UTC)
1131:21:00, 16 September 2024 (UTC)
1:
2639:20:11, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2609:12:55, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2590:03:12, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2572:02:34, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2543:02:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2338:WikiProject Tropical cyclones
2182:20:38, 9 September 2024 (UTC)
2146:07:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2128:07:27, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2113:07:00, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2094:05:31, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2075:01:29, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2054:02:30, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
2014:01:13, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
1998:06:53, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
1974:03:35, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
1959:01:28, 8 September 2024 (UTC)
1940:23:52, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1925:23:49, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1897:23:26, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1880:23:40, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1855:and after your nomination at
1843:23:18, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1821:23:11, 7 September 2024 (UTC)
1100:05:08, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
1079:07:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
1065:02:17, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
1049:07:53, 6 September 2024 (UTC)
1035:18:13, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
1020:17:51, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
1006:00:57, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
984:00:15, 5 September 2024 (UTC)
969:18:03, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
954:16:49, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
940:16:20, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
922:06:18, 4 September 2024 (UTC)
904:21:50, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
875:14:02, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
845:18:09, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
831:17:27, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
817:16:49, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
802:16:40, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
779:16:22, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
761:13:59, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
734:13:24, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
720:10:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
695:07:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
680:05:28, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
663:00:56, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
647:00:46, 3 September 2024 (UTC)
2706:Talk:Louis Edward Curdes/GA1
2248:has begun another review at
625:In addition, there are some
1751:Talk:Jorge Choquetarqui/GA1
631:Other episodes and specials
3143:
2626:WP:Policies and guidelines
2100:WP:Good article mentorship
1708:Talk:Marcelino Libanan/GA1
458:Nominations/Instructions:
112:
61:October 2024 Backlog Drive
1673:I was going to post this
1295:Historical figures: other
573:Historical figures: other
3106:I'll take a look at it.
3023:â Closed Limelike Curves
2966:â Closed Limelike Curves
2920:â Closed Limelike Curves
2391:Nineteen Ninety-Four guy
1859:failed, you immediately
1801:coordinator instructions
1720:Talk:Afrique Victime/GA1
1714:Talk:PiĂąon, Colorado/GA1
554:American football people
137:good article nominations
109:Good article nominations
2980:Special:Diff/1246448963
767:Caeciliusinhorto-public
753:Caeciliusinhorto-public
3064:Talk:Elijah Hewson/GA1
2935:Closed Limelike Curves
2827:Closed Limelike Curves
2813:Passed without comment
2685:
2462:Tropical Storm Kai-tak
1864:without making changes
1849:Typhoon Chanthu (2010)
786:James Dillon Armstrong
526:Lowercase sigmabot III
110:
2042:Good article criteria
1702:Talk:Sonny Matula/GA1
1315:have any opinion. --
141:good articles process
108:
2817:I just noticed that
2795:Trainsandotherthings
2660:WP:Secondary sources
2403:that's unnecessary.
2292:, could you address
1732:PerfectSoundWhatever
1281:Trainsandotherthings
1123:Trainsandotherthings
591:Royalty and nobility
2830:GAN has a problem.
2704:My review thusfar:
2700:Louis Edward Curdes
2692:Louis Edward Curdes
550:Warships of Germany
2764:IntentionallyDense
2720:IntentionallyDense
2664:WP:Primary sources
2576:I certainly don't
2280:IntentionallyDense
2233:IntentionallyDense
1986:IntentionallyDense
1966:IntentionallyDense
1932:IntentionallyDense
1889:IntentionallyDense
1861:nominated it again
1784:IntentionallyDense
111:
2877:Rollinginhisgrave
2414:
2381:Rollinginhisgrave
2365:
2342:Rollinginhisgrave
2298:Rollinginhisgrave
2294:Thebiguglyalien's
2219:Rollinginhisgrave
2120:Rollinginhisgrave
2081:Rollinginhisgrave
2067:Rollinginhisgrave
2046:Rollinginhisgrave
1637:
1555:
1380:
1238:
627:television series
609:Political figures
533:
532:
184:
183:
164:
163:
103:
102:
16:(Redirected from
3134:
3125:
3113:
3110:
3099:
3076:
2958:
2946:
2943:
2938:
2908:
2896:
2893:
2864:
2852:
2849:
2716:User:98.97.34.56
2712:User:98.97.46.82
2651:
2649:
2568:
2562:
2559:
2556:
2553:
2541:
2539:
2505:general audience
2472:
2421:
2419:
2412:
2409:
2384:
2372:
2370:
2363:
2360:
2318:
2271:
2265:
2262:
2259:
2256:
2205:
2199:
2196:
2193:
2190:
2178:
2172:
2169:
2166:
2163:
2092:
1921:
1915:
1912:
1909:
1906:
1841:
1773:that his reviews
1769:TechnoSquirrel69
1644:
1642:
1635:
1632:
1562:
1560:
1553:
1550:
1503:
1424:
1412:
1400:
1397:
1387:
1385:
1378:
1375:
1270:
1258:
1255:
1245:
1243:
1236:
1233:
1089:
902:
890:
887:
794:Caeciliusinhorto
718:
706:
703:
676:
579:European history
528:
510:
499:
488:
477:
196:
188:
173:
166:
154:
147:
125:
27:
21:
3142:
3141:
3137:
3136:
3135:
3133:
3132:
3131:
3115:
3111:
3108:
3083:
3070:
3067:
2948:
2944:
2941:
2932:
2898:
2894:
2891:
2854:
2850:
2847:
2815:
2688:
2666:on themselves.
2647:
2645:
2566:
2560:
2557:
2554:
2551:
2537:
2535:
2496:
2465:
2417:
2407:
2404:
2378:
2368:
2358:
2355:
2311:
2269:
2263:
2260:
2257:
2254:
2203:
2197:
2194:
2191:
2188:
2176:
2170:
2167:
2164:
2161:
2085:
1919:
1913:
1910:
1907:
1904:
1834:
1759:Talk:Sikidy/GA1
1745:His reviews at
1726:states that he
1670:
1640:
1630:
1627:
1608:
1558:
1548:
1545:
1525:
1497:
1465:
1418:
1402:
1398:
1395:
1383:
1373:
1370:
1333:
1297:
1260:
1256:
1253:
1241:
1231:
1228:
1196:
1176:
1139:
1087:
892:
888:
885:
708:
704:
701:
674:
538:
524:
513:
512:
511:
505:
500:
494:
489:
483:
478:
472:
466:
465:Search archives
201:
129:
128:
121:
117:
23:
22:
15:
12:
11:
5:
3140:
3138:
3130:
3129:
3066:
3061:
3060:
3059:
3058:
3057:
3056:
3055:
3054:
3053:
3052:
3051:
3050:
3049:
3048:
3047:
3037:David Eppstein
3019:
3018:
3017:
2998:David Eppstein
2984:David Eppstein
2916:
2915:
2914:
2913:
2912:
2869:
2868:
2814:
2811:
2810:
2809:
2808:
2807:
2806:
2805:
2790:
2789:
2788:
2687:
2684:
2683:
2682:
2681:
2680:
2679:
2678:
2611:
2592:
2574:
2495:
2492:
2491:
2490:
2489:
2488:
2487:
2486:
2485:
2484:
2483:
2482:
2481:
2480:
2479:
2478:
2477:
2476:
2458:
2457:
2456:
2455:
2454:
2443:
2425:
2387:worn the juice
2287:
2243:
2154:
2153:
2152:
2151:
2150:
2149:
2148:
2096:
2062:
2058:
2057:
2056:
2038:
2037:
2036:
2031:on this text:
2002:
2001:
2000:
1982:
1981:
1980:
1979:
1978:
1977:
1976:
1884:
1883:
1882:
1851:five days ago
1831:
1780:
1779:
1765:
1739:
1738:
1717:
1711:
1705:
1669:
1666:
1665:
1664:
1663:
1662:
1607:
1604:
1603:
1602:
1601:
1600:
1599:
1598:
1524:
1521:
1520:
1519:
1518:
1517:
1464:
1461:
1460:
1459:
1458:
1457:
1456:
1455:
1454:
1453:
1391:
1332:
1329:
1328:
1327:
1296:
1293:
1292:
1291:
1276:
1275:
1274:
1249:
1195:
1192:
1175:
1172:
1171:
1170:
1138:
1135:
1134:
1133:
1118:
1117:
1116:
1115:
1114:
1113:
1112:
1111:
1110:
1109:
1108:
1107:
1106:
1105:
1104:
1103:
1102:
1085:
1084:
1083:
1082:
1081:
1067:
1053:
1052:
1051:
877:
855:
854:
853:
852:
851:
850:
849:
848:
847:
819:
741:
697:
682:
668:
665:
623:
622:
612:
606:
600:
594:
588:
582:
576:
570:
564:
537:
534:
531:
530:
518:
515:
514:
507:
503:
501:
496:
492:
490:
485:
481:
479:
474:
470:
468:
467:
464:
463:
422:Reassessment:
334:
333:
325:
285:
245:
203:
202:
197:
191:
182:
181:
174:
162:
161:
155:
139:(GAN) and the
127:
126:
118:
113:
101:
100:
98:
93:
91:
86:
84:
79:
77:
75:Review circles
72:
70:
65:
63:
58:
56:
51:
49:
44:
42:
37:
35:
30:
24:
14:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
3139:
3128:
3123:
3119:
3114:
3105:
3104:
3103:
3102:
3098:
3097:
3093:
3092:
3088:
3087:
3080:
3079:Elijah Hewson
3074:
3065:
3062:
3046:
3042:
3038:
3034:
3033:
3032:
3028:
3024:
3020:
3015:
3012:
3011:
3009:
3008:
3007:
3003:
2999:
2995:
2994:
2993:
2989:
2985:
2981:
2977:
2976:
2975:
2971:
2967:
2963:
2962:
2961:
2956:
2952:
2947:
2936:
2931:
2930:
2929:
2925:
2921:
2917:
2911:
2906:
2902:
2897:
2888:
2887:
2886:
2882:
2878:
2873:
2872:
2871:
2870:
2867:
2862:
2858:
2853:
2844:
2843:
2842:
2841:
2837:
2833:
2828:
2824:
2820:
2812:
2804:
2800:
2796:
2791:
2787:
2783:
2779:
2775:
2774:
2773:
2769:
2765:
2761:
2760:
2759:
2755:
2751:
2747:
2746:
2745:
2741:
2737:
2732:
2731:
2730:
2729:
2725:
2721:
2717:
2713:
2708:
2707:
2702:
2701:
2696:
2693:
2677:
2673:
2669:
2665:
2661:
2656:
2655:
2654:
2650:
2642:
2641:
2640:
2636:
2632:
2627:
2622:
2617:
2612:
2610:
2606:
2602:
2598:
2593:
2591:
2587:
2583:
2579:
2575:
2573:
2569:
2563:
2547:
2546:
2545:
2544:
2540:
2531:
2529:
2525:
2521:
2517:
2512:
2510:
2506:
2502:
2493:
2475:
2471:
2468:
2463:
2459:
2453:
2449:
2444:
2442:
2438:
2434:
2430:
2426:
2424:
2420:
2410:
2402:
2401:
2400:
2396:
2392:
2388:
2382:
2377:
2376:
2375:
2371:
2361:
2353:
2352:
2351:
2347:
2343:
2339:
2335:
2334:Featured List
2331:
2327:
2323:
2322:
2321:
2317:
2314:
2309:
2308:
2307:
2303:
2299:
2295:
2291:
2288:
2285:
2281:
2278:
2277:
2276:
2272:
2266:
2251:
2247:
2244:
2242:
2238:
2234:
2230:
2229:
2228:
2224:
2220:
2216:
2212:
2211:
2210:
2206:
2200:
2185:
2184:
2183:
2179:
2173:
2158:
2155:
2147:
2143:
2139:
2138:GMH Melbourne
2136:on the page.
2135:
2131:
2130:
2129:
2125:
2121:
2116:
2115:
2114:
2110:
2106:
2105:GMH Melbourne
2101:
2097:
2095:
2091:
2088:
2082:
2078:
2077:
2076:
2072:
2068:
2063:
2059:
2055:
2051:
2047:
2043:
2039:
2033:
2032:
2030:
2027:
2023:
2020:
2017:
2016:
2015:
2011:
2007:
2003:
1999:
1995:
1991:
1990:GMH Melbourne
1987:
1983:
1975:
1971:
1967:
1962:
1961:
1960:
1956:
1952:
1948:
1943:
1942:
1941:
1937:
1933:
1928:
1927:
1926:
1922:
1916:
1900:
1899:
1898:
1894:
1890:
1885:
1881:
1877:
1873:
1869:
1865:
1862:
1858:
1854:
1850:
1846:
1845:
1844:
1840:
1837:
1832:
1829:
1825:
1824:
1823:
1822:
1818:
1814:
1810:
1804:
1802:
1798:
1794:
1789:
1785:
1777:
1774:
1770:
1766:
1764:
1760:
1756:
1752:
1748:
1744:
1743:
1742:
1737:
1733:
1729:
1725:
1721:
1718:
1715:
1712:
1709:
1706:
1703:
1700:
1699:
1698:
1695:
1692:
1687:
1686:
1684:
1683:GMH Melbourne
1680:
1676:
1667:
1661:
1657:
1653:
1649:
1648:
1647:
1643:
1633:
1625:
1624:
1623:
1622:
1618:
1614:
1605:
1597:
1593:
1589:
1585:
1581:
1580:
1579:
1575:
1571:
1567:
1566:
1565:
1561:
1551:
1542:
1541:
1540:
1539:
1535:
1531:
1522:
1516:
1512:
1508:
1501:
1496:
1495:
1494:
1490:
1486:
1482:
1481:
1480:
1479:
1475:
1471:
1462:
1452:
1448:
1444:
1439:
1438:
1437:
1433:
1429:
1422:
1421:Chipmunkdavis
1417:
1416:
1415:
1410:
1406:
1401:
1392:
1390:
1386:
1376:
1368:
1367:
1366:
1362:
1358:
1354:
1353:
1352:
1351:
1347:
1343:
1339:
1338:British Isles
1331:Europe and EU
1330:
1326:
1322:
1318:
1313:
1312:
1311:
1310:
1306:
1302:
1294:
1290:
1286:
1282:
1277:
1273:
1268:
1264:
1259:
1250:
1248:
1244:
1234:
1226:
1225:
1224:
1221:
1217:
1212:
1211:
1210:
1209:
1205:
1201:
1193:
1191:
1190:
1186:
1182:
1173:
1169:
1165:
1161:
1156:
1155:
1154:
1153:
1149:
1145:
1136:
1132:
1128:
1124:
1119:
1101:
1097:
1093:
1086:
1080:
1076:
1072:
1069:Ăire â duhh!
1068:
1066:
1062:
1058:
1054:
1050:
1046:
1042:
1038:
1037:
1036:
1032:
1028:
1023:
1022:
1021:
1017:
1013:
1009:
1008:
1007:
1003:
999:
995:
991:
990:Mike Christie
987:
986:
985:
981:
977:
972:
971:
970:
966:
962:
957:
956:
955:
951:
947:
943:
942:
941:
937:
933:
929:
925:
924:
923:
919:
915:
911:
907:
906:
905:
900:
896:
891:
882:
878:
876:
872:
868:
864:
860:
859:Mike Christie
856:
846:
842:
838:
834:
833:
832:
828:
824:
820:
818:
814:
810:
805:
804:
803:
799:
795:
791:
787:
782:
781:
780:
776:
772:
768:
764:
763:
762:
758:
754:
750:
746:
745:Mary Docherty
739:
737:
736:
735:
731:
727:
723:
722:
721:
716:
712:
707:
698:
696:
692:
688:
683:
681:
678:
677:
669:
666:
664:
660:
656:
651:
650:
649:
648:
644:
640:
634:
632:
628:
620:
616:
613:
610:
607:
604:
601:
598:
595:
592:
589:
586:
583:
580:
577:
574:
571:
568:
565:
562:
559:
558:
557:
555:
551:
547:
542:
536:GA categories
535:
527:
522:
517:
516:
462:
461:
456:
455:
451:
446:
445:
441:
437:
433:
429:
425:
420:
419:
415:
411:
407:
402:
401:
397:
393:
389:
385:
381:
377:
373:
369:
365:
361:
357:
353:
349:
345:
341:
336:
335:
332:
328:
324:
320:
316:
312:
308:
304:
300:
296:
292:
288:
284:
280:
276:
272:
268:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
244:
240:
236:
232:
228:
224:
220:
216:
212:
208:
205:
204:
200:
195:
190:
189:
186:
179:
175:
172:
168:
167:
160:
156:
153:
149:
148:
145:
142:
138:
134:
124:
120:
119:
116:
107:
99:
97:
94:
92:
90:
87:
85:
83:
80:
78:
76:
73:
71:
69:
66:
64:
62:
59:
57:
55:
52:
50:
48:
45:
43:
41:
38:
36:
34:
31:
29:
28:
19:
3095:
3090:
3085:
3068:
3013:
2816:
2709:
2703:
2697:
2689:
2577:
2532:
2513:
2497:
2326:TheNuggeteer
2290:TheNuggeteer
2284:WP:GAN/I#N4a
2246:TheNuggeteer
2157:TheNuggeteer
2026:them comment
2024:after I saw
1857:Talk:.tv/GA1
1805:
1781:
1740:
1696:
1691:TheNuggeteer
1688:
1672:
1671:
1609:
1526:
1466:
1334:
1298:
1197:
1177:
1140:
1039:Absolutely!
927:
749:Anthony Eden
675:Lee Vilenski
672:
635:
624:
543:
539:
520:
457:
447:
421:
403:
337:
198:
185:
132:
131:This is the
130:
89:Reassessment
81:
47:Instructions
3073:Royiswariii
3069:Yesterday,
2832:BlueMoonset
2823:GA criteria
2750:Billsmith60
2710:Nominator:
2509:GA criteria
2448:Elias / PSA
1652:Billsmith60
1071:Billsmith60
1041:Billsmith60
1012:Billsmith60
54:Nominations
3077:passed my
2668:TompaDompa
2631:TompaDompa
2582:asilvering
2044:just yet.
1734:tells him
1570:asilvering
1500:Asilvering
1485:asilvering
1317:asilvering
1027:asilvering
963:(he/him â˘
932:asilvering
809:asilvering
771:asilvering
726:asilvering
655:asilvering
404:Criteria:
178:centralise
133:discussion
82:Discussion
68:Mentorship
2467:đTheNugg
2313:đTheNugg
2134:this note
2087:đTheNugg
1836:đTheNugg
1828:Freedom4U
1788:talk page
1393:I agree.
1251:I agree.
1137:Follow-up
961:Shushugah
448:GA help:
135:page for
3122:contribs
3014:Warning:
2964:Thanks!
2955:contribs
2905:contribs
2861:contribs
2061:reviews.
1679:PCN02WPS
1523:Stadiums
1409:contribs
1369:agreed^
1267:contribs
998:contribs
899:contribs
867:contribs
715:contribs
585:Monarchs
199:Archives
176:To help
157:See the
115:Shortcut
40:Criteria
3082:side.--
2616:WP:LEAD
2605:they/it
2470:eteerđ
2464:an FA.
2450:đď¸đŞ
2437:they/it
2413:he/they
2364:he/they
2316:eteerđ
2090:eteerđ
1955:they/it
1876:they/it
1839:eteerđ
1817:they/it
1636:he/they
1554:he/they
1379:he/they
1237:he/they
1002:library
871:library
3109:Vacant
2942:Vacant
2892:Vacant
2848:Vacant
2698:Page:
2408:sawyer
2359:sawyer
2035:later.
2006:Drmies
1757:, and
1724:Drmies
1631:sawyer
1549:sawyer
1396:Vacant
1374:sawyer
1254:Vacant
1232:sawyer
1220:(talk)
928:either
886:Vacant
702:Vacant
521:7 days
123:WT:GAN
96:Report
2561:alien
2264:alien
2198:alien
2171:alien
1914:alien
1730:and @
1613:Z1720
1530:Z1720
1507:Z1720
1470:Z1720
1428:Z1720
1342:Z1720
1301:Z1720
1200:Z1720
1181:Z1720
1160:Z1720
1144:Z1720
976:Z1720
837:Z1720
639:Z1720
546:WP:FA
3118:talk
3096:ller
3091:chba
3086:Laun
3041:talk
3027:talk
3002:talk
2988:talk
2970:talk
2951:talk
2924:talk
2901:talk
2881:talk
2857:talk
2836:talk
2799:talk
2782:talk
2768:talk
2754:talk
2740:talk
2724:talk
2672:talk
2648:czar
2635:talk
2601:talk
2586:talk
2578:like
2567:talk
2558:ugly
2538:czar
2433:talk
2418:talk
2405:...
2395:talk
2369:talk
2356:...
2346:talk
2332:for
2302:talk
2270:talk
2261:ugly
2237:talk
2223:talk
2204:talk
2195:ugly
2177:talk
2168:ugly
2142:talk
2124:talk
2109:talk
2071:talk
2050:talk
2010:talk
1994:talk
1970:talk
1951:talk
1936:talk
1920:talk
1911:ugly
1893:talk
1872:talk
1866:. ~
1813:talk
1793:here
1763:here
1677:on @
1675:here
1656:talk
1641:talk
1628:...
1617:talk
1592:talk
1574:talk
1559:talk
1546:...
1534:talk
1511:talk
1489:talk
1474:talk
1447:talk
1432:talk
1405:talk
1384:talk
1371:...
1361:talk
1346:talk
1321:talk
1305:talk
1285:talk
1263:talk
1242:talk
1229:...
1204:talk
1185:talk
1164:talk
1148:talk
1127:talk
1096:talk
1075:talk
1061:talk
1045:talk
1031:talk
1016:talk
994:talk
980:talk
965:talk
950:talk
936:talk
918:talk
895:talk
863:talk
841:talk
827:talk
813:talk
798:talk
775:talk
757:talk
740:much
730:talk
711:talk
691:talk
659:talk
643:talk
338:GA:
33:Main
2778:CMD
2736:CMD
2597:F4U
2555:big
2552:The
2526:or
2518:or
2429:F4U
2389::P
2258:big
2255:The
2192:big
2189:The
2165:big
2162:The
1947:F4U
1908:big
1905:The
1868:F4U
1809:F4U
1786:'s
1588:CMD
1443:CMD
1357:CMD
1227:+1
1216:PMC
1092:CMD
1057:CMD
1000:-
946:CMD
914:CMD
869:-
823:CMD
687:CMD
3120:â˘
3043:)
3029:)
3004:)
2990:)
2972:)
2953:â˘
2926:)
2903:â˘
2883:)
2859:â˘
2838:)
2825:.
2801:)
2784:)
2770:)
2756:)
2742:)
2726:)
2718:.
2674:)
2637:)
2607:)
2603:â˘
2588:)
2570:)
2439:)
2435:â˘
2415:*
2411:*
2397:)
2366:*
2362:*
2348:)
2304:)
2273:)
2239:)
2225:)
2207:)
2180:)
2144:)
2126:)
2111:)
2073:)
2052:)
2021:,
2012:)
1996:)
1972:)
1957:)
1953:â˘
1938:)
1923:)
1895:)
1878:)
1874:â˘
1819:)
1815:â˘
1803:.
1753:,
1749:,
1658:)
1638:*
1634:*
1619:)
1594:)
1586:.
1576:)
1556:*
1552:*
1536:)
1513:)
1491:)
1476:)
1449:)
1434:)
1407:â˘
1381:*
1377:*
1363:)
1348:)
1323:)
1307:)
1287:)
1265:â˘
1239:*
1235:*
1218:â
1206:)
1187:)
1166:)
1150:)
1129:)
1098:)
1077:)
1063:)
1047:)
1033:)
1018:)
1004:)
996:-
982:)
967:)
952:)
938:)
920:)
912:.
897:â˘
883:.
873:)
865:-
843:)
829:)
815:)
800:)
777:)
759:)
732:)
713:â˘
693:)
661:)
645:)
552:,
452:,
442:,
438:,
434:,
430:,
426:,
416:,
412:,
408:,
400:16
398:,
396:15
394:,
392:14
390:,
388:13
386:,
384:12
382:,
380:11
378:,
376:10
374:,
370:,
366:,
362:,
358:,
354:,
350:,
346:,
342:,
331:32
329:,
327:31
323:30
321:,
319:29
317:,
315:28
313:,
311:27
309:,
307:26
305:,
303:25
301:,
299:24
297:,
295:23
293:,
291:22
289:,
287:21
283:20
281:,
279:19
277:,
275:18
273:,
271:17
269:,
267:16
265:,
263:15
261:,
259:14
257:,
255:13
253:,
251:12
249:,
247:11
243:10
241:,
237:,
233:,
229:,
225:,
221:,
217:,
213:,
209:,
3124:)
3116:(
3112:0
3075::
3071:@
3039:(
3025:(
3000:(
2986:(
2968:(
2957:)
2949:(
2945:0
2937::
2933:@
2922:(
2907:)
2899:(
2895:0
2879:(
2863:)
2855:(
2851:0
2834:(
2797:(
2780:(
2766:(
2752:(
2738:(
2722:(
2670:(
2633:(
2599:(
2584:(
2564:(
2431:(
2393:(
2383::
2379:@
2344:(
2300:(
2267:(
2235:(
2221:(
2201:(
2174:(
2140:(
2122:(
2107:(
2079:@
2069:(
2048:(
2008:(
1992:(
1984:@
1968:(
1949:(
1934:(
1917:(
1891:(
1870:(
1826:@
1811:(
1778:.
1767:@
1654:(
1615:(
1590:(
1572:(
1532:(
1509:(
1502::
1498:@
1487:(
1472:(
1445:(
1430:(
1423::
1419:@
1411:)
1403:(
1399:0
1359:(
1344:(
1319:(
1303:(
1283:(
1269:)
1261:(
1257:0
1214:â
1202:(
1183:(
1162:(
1146:(
1125:(
1094:(
1073:(
1059:(
1043:(
1029:(
1014:(
992:(
978:(
948:(
934:(
916:(
901:)
893:(
889:0
861:(
839:(
825:(
811:(
796:(
773:(
765:@
755:(
728:(
717:)
709:(
705:0
689:(
657:(
641:(
529:.
460:1
454:2
450:1
444:6
440:5
436:4
432:3
428:2
424:1
418:4
414:3
410:2
406:1
372:9
368:8
364:7
360:6
356:5
352:4
348:3
344:2
340:1
239:9
235:8
231:7
227:6
223:5
219:4
215:3
211:2
207:1
20:)
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
