User talk:ThePromenader/Archive 2 2017 April
 | This is an archive of past discussions with User:ThePromenader. 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. |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Paris you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. 
This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Geojournal -- Geojournal (talk) 22:00, 2 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you!
- Is there any particular place we can follow this process, and perhaps make improvements as it progresses? Best, THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 12:44, 4 April 2017 (UTC) i
- (talk page stalker) The link to the ongoing review is here.--Gilderien Chat|List of good deeds 15:43, 4 April 2017 (UTC)
The article Paris you nominated as a good article has passed 
; see Talk:Paris for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Geojournal -- Geojournal (talk) 00:01, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you! THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 07:42, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Bravo!
Congratulations on getting GA Status for Paris. Your determination and good work made all the difference. Whats your next challenge? Best wishes and thanks SiefkinDR (talk) 18:30, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- No, YOU, sir, you've by far outdone me. FA status, of course! ; ) THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 20:05, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
Precious
Amoureux de Paris.
Thank you for quality article work around Paris, restoring its GA splendour, such as Chemin de fer de Petite Ceinture, for adding images of the city of light, for "The infobox is finally done - but the map coordinates could use some work." and "Amoureux de Paris.", - merci, you are an awesome Wikipedian!
--Gerda Arendt (talk) 13:06, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- Thank you, but I was far from alone in that! But I'm touched, thank you very much, your appreciation makes it all seem worth it ; ) ; ) ; ) THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 14:07, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- The best thing about Wikipedia is that you are not alone. - I just asked two people who speak French for help with François Bott, translated by LouisAlain, and needing better sources. I found two books where he's mentioned, but can't read them, [1] and [2], - is there something to support the facts, or something to add? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:29, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- I'm not familiar with the author, but those redlinks aside, the article looks pretty good. The best I can do is add a 'cn' (citation needed) tag on any challengable claims.
- As for citing the book, it depends on what evidence you're looking for... if you can tell me what claim you're trying to support, I can have a look. Cheers! THEPROMENADER ✎ ✓ 15:30, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- It's rather the simple things that are not covered by the present sources, such as studies, work with the three papers mentioned (from - to), - any paragraph without a citation will be questioned, DYK? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:49, 5 April 2017 (UTC)
- The best thing about Wikipedia is that you are not alone. - I just asked two people who speak French for help with François Bott, translated by LouisAlain, and needing better sources. I found two books where he's mentioned, but can't read them, [1] and [2], - is there something to support the facts, or something to add? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 14:29, 5 April 2017 (UTC)