User talk:GamerPro64/Archive 3

This 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.

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Archive 5

→

Archive 10

Hey, congrats on the GA. Yeah, I'd love to help. For right now, I'll probably be kinda spotty, but I will definitely kick it into high gear. I need to first check out "Rivers Edge" from my library again!--Gen. Quon (talk) 01:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

OK, cool. I started to arrange the article like we had Weezer (2001 album) and I copied and pasted what you had on your sandbox into the article, which can be changed if necessary. I think it will look good!Gen. Quon (talk) 23:58, 19 January 2011 (UTC)

20:56, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Ugh, yeah, I suppose it should be- it's mentioned in Music of the Final Fantasy series. I'll see if I can get the article up to GA this week, or merge it back into the movie's article if it can't be. I don't know what the general rule is for movie soundtracks. --PresN 02:32, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Have you forgot about the good article reassessment you have to close? If so you probably will consider removing it. Nascar1996 21:23, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

I didn't read them. Oh, well. I'm not worried about them, because I normally don't have to go throught that process. Nascar1996 22:02, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Sure! I enjoy horror films, but it's not my main genre or anything. I dig all films, but lately I've been working a lot on MST3K films (my current project is Night of the Blood Beast), so there's a lot of horror/sci-fi overlap there. I'm happy to join the WikiProject though, thanks for thinking of me! By the way, I've got The Incredible Melting Man nominated for GA right now, if you'd like to take a look at it. — Hunter Kahn 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

• By the way, you should sign my autograph book. I don't ask everyone to sign, just people I've had positive wiki-experiences with. :) — Hunter Kahn 22:26, 7 February 2011 (UTC)

Can you go ahead and demote it for me? My internet is sortof crippled at the moment. --Teancum (talk) 17:29, 12 February 2011 (UTC)

Done. Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • ^{(Otters want attention)} 23:02, 15 February 2011 (UTC)

I saw your message on his talk page. Mine is one of the articles that was in the process of being reviewed by him. What do you think could/should happen about that? BollyJeff || talk 02:32, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

First, I want to thank you for taking the time to review the article. I had a few questions about your review. First, you said that there were some MoS problems. Could you point out the problems you saw, so that they can be fixed? Also, I noticed that you demerited the article on the grounds that the main game section was unreferenced. The intent of those section was to be a general plot summary of a typical episode; thus, an episode like the one cited at the top of the summary would appear to be a sufficient source throughout (except in the cases of specific gameplay rules that were applied only on a few episodes). As a plot summary, it seems that citations are not necessary for every single sentence stating a fact that should be obvious to anyone who has seen an episode of the show (see WP:When to cite#When a source may not be needed). Also, I wasn't aware that the episode list had a problem with citation. I've seen other TV episode lists without citations, so I'm not sure whether they are absolutely necessary here (or if the subarticle should just be deleted). Finally, with regards to the review section, I've had some trouble finding reliable sources from both past and present reviewing the show; all the sources that I've found are already in the article (with the exception of a 1993 review by TV Guide, which I have not been able to get a copy of to read).

Again, I want to thank you for your time in reviewing the article. However, if you would clarify (or possible reconsider) your review, I would appreciate it, so that the issues with the article can be fixed for another good article nomination. Thanks, RJaguar3 | u | t 02:35, 1 March 2011 (UTC).

As you reviewed the last Dragon Quest FAC, your input is wanted for the current version if possible. Thanks.陣内_Jinnai 16:53, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

I got confused as someone else from the DQTF also came in their and disussed a lot. Anyway, it doesn't change the fact that you might want to check out the FAC.陣内_Jinnai 20:01, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your review. MartinPoulter (talk) 16:40, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello GamerPro64. Further to your message I will have a go today at sorting out as many problems as I can. Thanks for your patience. Jprw (talk) 06:03, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Attempt made, please see here. Jprw (talk) 07:35, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

Because after going through the talk page, it appeared to me that there is no intention of GANning it in the near future and I am sure that once a reviewer comes usual contributors will jump into fixing any issues. I've found in the past many articles many good articles that were not actually labelled as good, but which end up being forgotten. Last time I remember checking, GANning does not require to be a contributor so I don't see what is the harm. If anybody minds I sure they can revert the nomination without any drama. Nergaal (talk) 02:09, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

Looks like my brief away period has extended to a couple months now. I'm basically juggling three full-time activities (last semester at college, work, and game design). —Deckiller (t-c-l) 03:58, 10 March 2011 (UTC)

I've reviwed it. Although i was slightly un nerved by this guy wjematherbigissue. Personally I think you may want to ignore some of his comments, so if it seams crap that's why. KnowIG (talk) 20:59, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

From looking at this I may have to fail it before a ruck starts. His a bit of a bully apparently. KnowIG (talk) 21:02, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

User:Swarm is working on it, still, so I'm inclined to give him the weekend before wrapping it up. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 00:45, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Actually I just saw his userpage, so if no one's going to step up to the plate I'm just gonna fail it. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 00:58, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll try to tomorrow (I've got a lot of preproduction for a shoot, but hopefully I'll have some downtime too.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 01:14, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi, you made a post to the salsa music talk page about FAR, I was wondering what FAR is? Cold Salsero (talk) 04:28, 19 March 2011 (UTC)

I did, did I do something wrong? I read the criteriaDarkwarriorblake (talk)

A lot of posts by MikeAllen? I don't know what I'm looking for. I didn't see any evidence of an edit war or something.Darkwarriorblake (talk)

How do I do that? Never done a GA beforeDarkwarriorblake (talk) 00:51, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

Listed it. I would've closed it but I thought other people had to have their say first. Thanks for the heads upDarkwarriorblake (talk) 01:03, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

There's a guide to closing that hits essentially everything at Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Nomination procedure. If you're able to do a couple older ones that'd be great. Couldn't seem to find time to work both FTC and the GA drive this month. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 22:38, 27 March 2011 (UTC)

It's quite alright, I'm far too inactive to work on it rihgt now. Thanks for the note. Nomader ^(Talk) 01:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Someone obviously tried to edit one of the GA page themselves manually, but added a redlink instead. I've undone LivingBot: it shouldn't be a recurrent problem. Regards, - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 21:58, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Only because User:Ltinez added another red link. I left him/her a note. - Jarry1250 ^{[Who? Discuss.]} 22:06, 28 March 2011 (UTC)

Hey, Gamer, would you be up for an interview for the VG newsletter? Let me know! Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:06, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll draft up some questions this week and ping you when they are ready for your perusal :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 00:58, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

Here's some standards and some openers at the bottom of the draft... Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Newsletter/draft. Be careful, I might ask you why you don't have a userpage next :P Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:58, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Sounds like Guy might have some additional ones, so I will get back to my own work and leave you in his capable hands :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:56, 1 April 2011 (UTC)

FYI- I just posted them. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:15, 1 April 2011 (UTC))

Hi GamerPro - The FAR page is starting to dwindle, with few articles having been entered into the front end of the process over the past couple of months. I was wondering if you'd like to nominate a couple of articles over the next couple of weeks (not all at once, but relaxing the one per section per nominator rule for a bit). I don't know if you have "work needed" notices outstanding on any at the moment, but Tuberculosis and Abu Musab al-Zarqawi are two that have had notices on the talk page and no subsequent work. If you're not interested, no big deal, but if you have the time to sweep through a few articles and maybe nominate one or two, it would be great. My only request would be to try not to nominate multiple articles from the same author or same project, so that we don't overload them. It would be nice if the page was running at about 20-25 articles (saying this mainly so you can get a feel of what I'm looking for eventually!). Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 15:35, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 21:46, 6 April 2011 (UTC)

You have been invited for a discussion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of DJMax track listings. Your input would be greatly appreciated.Bread Ninja (talk) 16:43, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Hey. At FTC there's going to be a MLB first-round draft pick topic nom up within the next few days. I'm a primary contributor to it so you'll have to close it when consensus is reached. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:25, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

In regards to the FTC page, you have to do a null edit on each page after you add everything in. Then they'll show up as featured. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:37, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

User:Harry Blue5 is actually responsible for that article, so in the future, direct stuff about Chell to him. I'll make sure to send it over to him; great find! - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 23:19, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

On 16 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Chrono Trigger: Crimson Echoes, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Chrono Trigger: Crimson Echoes was in development from 2004 to 2009 before a cease-and-desist letter from Square Enix led to its cancellation? If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

The DYK project (nominate) 12:04, 16 May 2011 (UTC)

I was wondering if you could help iron out some of the MOS/grammar issues in the article that were brought up at FAC. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 05:12, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the assistance. When you start working on the Pokémon video games list, I'll make sure to throw you a hand. Do you think that Glass Joe is clean enough to pass FAC yet? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 01:57, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Aight, cool. I just hope that Nikkimaria thinks that the writing has improved. AFAICS, that's the only issue that she posted that may still pose a problem. Of course, I'm more worried about lack of response more so than opposition. After all, you don't learn anything if you get no response whatsoever. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:29, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Hey. Could you go back and double-check your promotions over the past couple months? I took a look at the 1971 Atlantic hurricane season GT and saw that about half the steps noted above were not completed. I fixed that one, but it looks like others have problems as well. I'll try to hit them all this weekend, but hopefully you can fix any issues. Step 9 in particular I know is being skipped, which makes it harder to keep track of these. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:04, 25 May 2011 (UTC)

Actually I went through the rest, and everything checks out in your recent ones (sans adding the number update in Wikipedia:Good topics/count, so the above can be ignored. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 18:43, 26 May 2011 (UTC)

Would you say the article is good enough now? :) Theleftorium ^(talk) 16:38, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

Aye, I'd forgotten. I've gotten started and will finish up early next week, thanks for the reminder (also: actual redirect to talk page! but still a redlink! moving up!) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 20:24, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Sure, that'd be fine. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 02:35, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Gamer- Mind if I ask some follow up questions? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:27, 15 June 2011 (UTC))

Hey, sorry about not being active during that GAR. I have my own business now and I don't check my Wikipedia talk nearly as often as I should. Mike H. Fierce! 05:36, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Hey. This can wait until you get back from vacation, but noting this before I forget. In the FT Wikipedia:Featured topics/Final Fantasy XII, Fortress is currently listed, and was in retention for when it would be released. However, the game has since been cancelled. I'm not sure whether it should now be removed since it won't happen, or if we should just start the 3 month retention period now, since there may be enough to bring it to GA. You have a thought on that? Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:23, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Hello,

It's that time again to update membership status with the Nintendo task force, which we try to do periodically to keep our membership up-to-date.

All participants have been placed on an "Inactive participants" list. To confirm that you're still a member of the Nintendo task force, simply go to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Nintendo#Members and move your name from the "Inactive participants" list to the bottom of the "Active participants" list. If you are no longer an active member in the task force, you may simply remove your name altogether. After 1 month, on 1 August 2011, all entries under the "Inactive participants" list will be removed. Hopefully you can stay with us and continue to work on Nintendo-related articles. Regards, MuZemike delivered by MuZebot 17:14, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, I made a large number of edits to Pilotwings after getting Pilotwings 64 to GA status. I'd say that the former is pretty close to GA nomination quality. The gameplay still needs to be trimmed a little bit, the critical reception needs to be expanded, and the whole article could use a copyedit. Feel free to contribute and nominate it if you like. ~ Hibana (talk) 00:18, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

That would be fine. ~ Hibana (talk) 00:51, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Anyway, I'd be glad to copyedit the article—Pilotwings has always interested me. I'll start in on it tomorrow. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:46, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

• Done. It's definitely not a FAC-level copyedit, but it should help you at GAN. Good luck. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 17:19, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

I am looking for your feedback on the current policy as it relates to your comment.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 05:51, 31 July 2011 (UTC)

Dabomb87 (talk) 17:43, 1 August 2011 (UTC)

Mucked with the lead for you. --PresN 21:48, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, it's fine as to CE- you need a source at the end there, but that's it. I still say that you should have a quick summary of what Chrono Trigger's Gameplay is- like a three sentence summary or so, right after "the gameplay was similar to that of the original title." Once you've got that, assuming that every source out there is used, just give it a good copy-edit and nominate it for GA. --PresN 19:42, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Well, if you can't find a source you can't find a source. I don't think it's super important; just drop it and leave Jonathan a note (I doubt he has an RS, he probably just played the game). --PresN 20:10, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

There you go. Read that. LadyofShalott 03:34, 4 August 2011 (UTC)

It's on hold. —WP:PENGUIN · ^{[ TALK ]} 20:57, 5 August 2011 (UTC)

Gamer- I took a look at Super Mario RPG: Legend of the Seven Stars, which recently passed GA, and there are some issues that I think warrants a GAR. If you have the time, would you look over the article to see if you agree? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:47, 8 August 2011 (UTC))

These are the issues in Seven Stars that I noticed after a quick sweep.

• Number of non-free images (should probably check the FURs too)
• Paragraphs that are only 1–2 sentences long
• The "Virtual Console" section looks like it has undue weight and should be combined with legacy
• Some sources don't look like they meet with WP:RS

I hope those are the only issues, but I worry that further scrutiny will uncover others. I didn't look at Galaxy, but I'll give it a similar sweep.

Another issue I want us to keep in mind is that this looks like an editor that recently became active with video game articles. Though he's inexperienced with our common practices, he's quite enthusiastic and shows good promise. I'd like us to reach out to help him edit articles and avoid "biting" him. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 14:50, 9 August 2011 (UTC))

Here's what stood out to me about Galaxy 2.

• Number of non-free images (should probably check the FURs too)
• Lengthy review table
• Paragraphs that are only 1–2 sentences long
• Some sources do not list the publisher
• Some sources don't look like they are reliable

This article looks to be in better shape than Seven Stars, but the issues should still be addressed if the article is to keep its GA rating. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 19:46, 9 August 2011 (UTC))

Heh, sorry about that; didn't mean to snub you. In any case, do you have an opinion on the issue at hand? As a delegate for this sort of thing, I assume you've seen your fair share of topic scope definitions. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 02:54, 27 August 2011 (UTC)

• Thanks for the response, and good luck with Irene. Anyway, I've still got a few questions. First, don't Command & Conquer et al fall under clearly-defined topics already? I mean, "Command & Conquer series", "Westwood games", "Madden series", "Destruction Derby series", etc. For example, Seamus Blackley worked with Looking Glass for something like 3 years and was key to the development of Flight Unlimited. But if I was to make a topic for "Looking Glass Studios" overall (not just the games), there's no way I'd put him in it. His work with Dreamworks Interactive on Jurassic Park: Trespasser and with Microsoft on the Xbox is clearly more notable. I'd argue that the same logic applies to Command & Conquer, Madden '93 and Destruction Derby 64. Looking Glass developed ports and slight reworks, but these works aren't "identified" with them in the sense that, for example, Command & Conquer is identified with Westwood. As for Car & Driver, I think that the box credits complicate the subject of authorship. The credits presented in the game's opening don't clarify much either, since they clash both with the box and with the copyright on the main menu, which reads "1992 Edward Lerner". I don't think GameSpot's authority is worth much on this subject, since they often don't put much thought into their developer/publisher listings. F-22 Interceptor (another Lerner Research game) is credited solely to Electronic Arts, for instance. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 00:50, 29 August 2011 (UTC)
  • Okay, looks like everything's been sorted out. If you have time, I have a slightly related question for you. Would a topic including System Shock (as the main article), System Shock 2 and SHODAN be viable? Or would I need a better main article? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 02:27, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
    • There might be, actually. I'd assumed that the series as a whole didn't deserve an article, but it's quite possible that it has received enough coverage. I'll have to look into that. Thanks for your help. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 00:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey. At some point, would you be able to promote this? I could, but since I put it up originally I'd rather not just to be safe, even though it was just a procedural nom. A lot of the maintenance stuff (creating categories, topic page, etc.) has been done already since it was a GT so it should be a fairly easy one to do. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:23, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

If you think you have one, even if it's unsure, then you're welcome to give it a shot. It's why we have others comment, to make sure noms like that aren't missing anything. That's assuming, of course, that the topic in mind has all GAs/FAs already. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:36, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

I just dropped by to say great work on the Pilotwings article. I love reading about older games, and enjoyed reading about the game's use of Mode 7. Thanks! --Odie5533 (talk) 08:14, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

After looking through everything, a little annoyed at my findings. I did in fact remove the article from GA, yet was reverted a few days later and never noticed. Also, I'm going to change the GAR page since those templates weren't working despite me doing precisely what GAR says to do when delisting an article. Fixing everything now, though I'm learning that looking through abandoned individual GA reassessments (aka pretty much all of them) is no fun. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:13, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

★★★★ 21:56, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:C99 KingZealsketch.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Sven Manguard Wha? 17:29, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

I came across an old peer review you initiated about the song Jesus Walks, and after reviewing the modern state of the article, I wanted to know if you were still interested in the article becoming a GA? If you nominated the article with a little work, I would volunteer to review it, and it would most likely pass. With a little work, mostly with a few dead links, which I could assist with. Bruce Campbell (talk) 17:04, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Oh, oups, I removed it by mistake because my computer was being weird and I was trying to add something further. I restored it.

And concerning the dead links, the problem is that Billboard doesn't archive alot of their information. So either a large chunk of the Chart Performance section would have to be removed, (which is the main source of the dead links) or we'd have to find the information elsewhere. Since it's primarily your article, I didn't want to act on anything without permission. Bruce Campbell (talk) 18:06, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I added an audio sample for starters, and after some digging I can't really find any archived sources for alot of those references, so, I presume, alot of the chart information would be required to be removed. Bruce Campbell (talk) 18:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I don't have a Billboard account, but there are ways to still reference things like that without one, like using a reference like this; ^[1]. You just have to adjust the dates, I think. Bruce Campbell (talk) 19:24, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Either we could use:

• "The Billboard Hot 100 – Jesus Walks". Billboard. Prometheus Global Media. 2004-04-12. Retrieved 2011-10-21.
• "The Billboard Hot 100 – Jesus Walks". Billboard. Prometheus Global Media. 2004-04-19. Retrieved 2011-10-21.
• "The Billboard Hot 100 – Jesus Walks". Billboard. Prometheus Global Media. 2004-04-26. Retrieved 2011-10-21.

but with ref tags added on the article itself, or we could find the references from other GA article from songs that were topping the charts the same time that Jesus Walks was. Bruce Campbell (talk) 19:50, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

I dunno, but I found this which covers the information referenced in a few of the dead links. Bruce Campbell (talk) 20:45, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi there, thanks for saying that you'd support The Human Centipede (First Sequence) being on the Main Page this year for Halloween. I just thought I'd let you know that I've formally nominated it now, so if you could repeat your support on the nomination page it would be really helpful. The page is at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests. Thanks! cya Coolug (talk) 10:26, 25 October 2011 (UTC)

Sorry, but I just have too much on my plate right now. I'm barely scraping together enough time to work on P.N.03 with Guyinblack. I hope someone else is available to help you. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 00:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Hey. Would either you or Jim be able to comment in support or opposition to the topic, as it seems to have stalled? That should have show what weight the oppose has one way or the other, and then the other delegate can close it (I can't touch it of course since I nom'd it). Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 02:48, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

It seems like every time I go through and fix a few of those articles with bare urls, 10 more pop up my new editors, and sometimes they're selfrefs at that. I've sunk so much time into the topic that I don't know if I can do it. I'll finish what I can later today, but just close it however you want today or tomorrow, I likely won't be working on it after today (if the pro wrestling group of editors won't keep an eye on them then I have no reason to). Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:28, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, and done. Also, the Spongiforma GT can be promoted if you or Jim could; won't have time to touch GT this week. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:20, 13 November 2011 (UTC)

Yeah, there's a new user on the block recreating these articles. I've tried explaining that they don't really have enough coverage to make decent articles, but they haven't been listening. Urgh. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:42, 12 November 2011 (UTC)

Since all of my GTCs haven't passed, I thought it'd be best to run this by someone more familiar with FTs/GTs:

I plan to start a new project, this:

I thought of this in mind for a FT (or just GT) but, after looking at the media sections of both, it does not seem like there are any examples I could model my project off of. As of now, do I have all I need to make it a topic? Before I try to start bringing those article's up to GA/FA, I would like to know how many actual article's I am going to be dealing with. I've included the film, the book it's screenplay was adapted from, the person the film is based on, it's score/soundtrack, the list regarding it's awards, the director and principal actor. Like, if I were to nominate this now, is it likely a user would oppose it since it's cast (like Amber Tamblyn and Kate Mara, who have bit roles) and producers/writers aren't at least GAs? Regards Crystal Clear x3

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Pilotwings a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk)

Done with that, will promote the Song FT as well. If you could promote the two GTs at the bottom at some point in the next day or two that would be great; I've had very little time this month and December doesn't look to be any better. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 03:55, 29 November 2011 (UTC)