User talk:Sarastro1: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit Next edit →

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Revision as of 05:22, 10 June 2015

Archives

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

Congratulations!

Congratulations on the D'Oliveira affair being today's Featured Article. JH (talk page) 09:58, 27 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Today's featured article/May 16, 2015

You know the drill. I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? I'd appreciate it if you could check the article one more time before its day on the Main Page. - Dank (push to talk) 00:00, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank: Sadly, Sarastro1 hasn't been active on Wikipedia for about five months now. I'll try and have a look over this in his absence though. Harrias ^talk 07:05, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ah I didn't know that ... thx much Harrias. - Dank (push to talk) 13:31, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Dank:, @Harrias:: I'm around a little bit, and have had look now. Cheers! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:30, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't want to say anything in case I scared you back off again! Harrias ^talk 21:34, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, it's HIM!!! Sarastro1 (talk) 21:36, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tweaks look good. - Dank (push to talk) 21:38, 1 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Now the article looks good, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Hello from the team at Featured article review!

We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.

Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.

Thanks for your help! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 19:39, 30 April 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Crawford

It's good to have you back! I was tempted to buy the book, but I have so many books that I haven't found the time to read (and DVDs that I haven't found the time to watch) that so far I've resisted that temptation. I couldn't stop myself from buying Stephen Chalke's new history of the County Championship, though. JH (talk page) 09:06, 2 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Welcome

Hello Sarastro, just saying welcome back from hibernation. If you do indeed keep YM's extensive library of cricketing contributions in order, that would be a fine thing. hamiltonstone (talk) 13:07, 5 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Ranji

Don't know if you've noticed, but Ranjitsinhji has had a drive-by nom for GA. I know you did a bit of work on his article before, so wondered if you thought it was in a suitable state? Harrias ^talk 12:20, 16 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

	The Civility Barnstar
	Couldn't really stop myself from wishing you for this edit —Vensatry _(ping) 18:21, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

2003 Cricket World Cup Final

Hi, I'm planning to take the article to FAC. It would be so kind of you if you could give your feedback and inputs here. Thanks, —Vensatry _(ping) 17:49, 28 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A cricket favor

Hi Sarastro,

Would you take a look at the TFA blurb for Ian Craig for me? I'm specifically looking for confirmation that his records stated in the blurb (1) agree with those stated in the article, and (2) all still stand. I have done some work on the article and believe it is in fine shape, but I am a bit hampered by my inability to read cricketspeak. Thank you! Maralia (talk) 04:41, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Seconding the request. I scheduled it as Maralia and you had previously gone over the article and found it to be more or less acceptable, but any extra bit of caution helps. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 04:45, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
- @Maralia and Crisco 1492: I've had a look and rejigged it quite a bit. Feel free to tweak anything, but I think it's a better cricket balance now. I'm also just having a look at the article today and tomorrow as I think there are a few little points that need tidying up before TFA day. Nothing major though; again, feel free to check that I'm not making a mess. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:39, 7 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
  - They are both improved—thank you! Crisco 1492, I see that the infobox image is not long for this world. Could it perhaps be retained with a FUR, or is a single non-free image of a deceased person verboten these days? Maralia (talk) 01:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
    - Yeah, a FUR would work. — Chris Woodrich (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]
      - Hey @Crisco 1492: check my work at File:Ian Craig.JPG? Maralia (talk) 05:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 63: / Line 63: @@
 ***They are both improved—thank you! {{u|Crisco 1492}}, I see that the infobox image is not long for this world. Could it perhaps be retained with a FUR, or is a single non-free image of a deceased person verboten these days? [[User:Maralia|Maralia]] ([[User talk:Maralia|talk]]) 01:13, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
 ****Yeah, a FUR would work.&nbsp;—&nbsp;[[User:Crisco 1492|Chris Woodrich]] ([[User talk:Crisco 1492|talk]]) 01:14, 8 June 2015 (UTC)
+*****Hey {{ping|Crisco 1492}} check my work at [[:File:Ian Craig.JPG]]? [[User:Maralia|Maralia]] ([[User talk:Maralia|talk]]) 05:22, 10 June 2015 (UTC)