User talk:Tommy turrell

Hello, Tommy turrell! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. You may benefit from following some of the links below, which will help you get the most out of Wikipedia. If you have any questions you can ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or by typing four tildes "~~~~"; this will automatically produce your name and the date. If you are already loving Wikipedia you might want to consider being "adopted" by a more experienced editor or joining a WikiProject to collaborate with others in creating and improving articles of your interest. Click here for a directory of all the WikiProjects. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Happy editing! LittleOldMe 16:32, 23 August 2007 (UTC) Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Community Portal • Adopt-a-user program Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • Resolving disputes Build consensus • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Categories • Disambiguity • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

GA

OK - will look. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 16:44, 28 January 2008 (UTC)

Likewise! I think we can certainly say the article is greatly improved from a couple of months ago! 4u1e (talk) 16:36, 4 February 2008 (UTC)

Hi Tommy. I see no reason why the article shouldn't get to FA, but it will need more work. I usually find it helpful to get comments from others (possibly because I'm lazy and need others to react to or against!). I would suggest that the next phase is to get a peer review at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Peer_review, where I've had good feedback before. I would also suggest pointing anyone you know here who might provide useful feedback in that direction. What do you think? 4u1e (talk) 18:26, 11 February 2008 (UTC)

Yup, Phill (aka Skully) would be a good one to ask. He led on getting Damon Hill, Alain Prost and Tom Pryce to FA. As you've seen, I've already asked Royalbroil to have a look as well. I'll list it at WP:BIO/PR and maybe ask some others for their thoughts and contributions. 4u1e (talk) 17:21, 13 February 2008 (UTC)

Re:Max Mosley

Thanks, it's no problem at all. I know that the peer review process is important - I intend to ask for one with my own "pet project", Forti, at some stage in the future. Happy editing!-- Diniz (talk) 00:22, 14 February 2008 (UTC)

Hello Tommy, nice to meet you, haven't really had the pleasure of seeing you on Wikipedia. However, like Michael Schumacher and Ferrari, Mosley is a subject that I am very touchy with, however I'll have a look at the article tomorrow, I've been on the PC all day and my eyes are in much needed rest.

Rest assure Tom, I will have a look at it tomorrow when my eyes are better and I'm is in a better frame of mind to give advice on an article. Thanks for the message Tom and good luck in the future. ;-) --Phill ^{talk Edits} _{Review this GA review!} 22:12, 18 March 2008 (UTC)

Mozza

Thanks - will do. 4u1e (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Have you dropped in a note at WP:F1, btw? 4u1e (talk) 16:29, 14 March 2008 (UTC)

Who else?

I finally found a little titbit on Mosley's later political aspirations. Nothing on Labour, but according to Lovell between 1982 and 1984 he worked for the Conservative Party, in the hope of becoming a parliamentary candidate. I've added it to the 'Politics' section. I think we're getting close, by the way! 4u1e (talk) 20:28, 28 March 2008 (UTC)

Re: Mosley FA

Featured articles are expected to be stable, so until this scandal is over, promotion to FA is impossible anyway. MaxSem^{(Han shot first!)} 18:49, 30 March 2008 (UTC)

Regarding the FAC (assuming your enthusiasm remains intact!), I suggest we tidy up the existing comments, then wait til this story has played out. Looks to me like he'll have to resign, since the latest quotes seem to be an acceptance that the videos are genuine. 4u1e (talk) 20:55, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

Max

Autosport has the same story, pretty much. I'm obviously missing something you're seeing - you may have to be a bit more obvious! :D I always assumed Serp91 was likely someone vaguely connected to Max Mosley through the FIA (given that his/her stance was basically pro-Mosley). You never quite know who you're really dealing with here though, I had a fairly lengthy debate with someone who claimed to be, and quite possibly was, Tom Rubython a few months ago. He wasn't very pleased with the contents of articles relating to him either... 4u1e (talk) 20:53, 1 April 2008 (UTC)

True, it is quite a similar 'voice'. Hmmm....interesting thought! 4u1e (talk) 16:19, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

Toyota

Good catch, thanks. 4u1e (talk) 17:10, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

It's hard to move on until you feel you've finished, isn't it? Dennis for FIA pres. The mind boggles. Mind you, my mind's already boggling at recent revelations. The first things that come to mind that need serious attention are Team Lotus and Juan Manuel Fangio. Any good? 4u1e (talk) 17:45, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Frank Williams would also be good. And would give you a change to practice your newly found knowledge on the correct forms of address for CBEs etc. Oh, another thing to bear in mind is how much material is available - all three of those suggestions should have plenty available on the web and in readily available books. 4u1e (talk) 18:23, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Oh, by the way, an anon has just added a reference from Sportspro magazine to the Mosley article. Sportspro is edited by a chap called Tom Rubython, former editor of BusinessF1 Magazine. I think it's fair to say he and his magazines have a bit of a track record of making libellous claims. In former cases he's been involved in, both he and those on the other side of the argument have edited Wikipedia to satisfy their version of events (see here). As he's not keen on the FIA or Mosley, it's possible we'll see the same thing here, so it's worth keeping an eye on. Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 18:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Sounds familiar. I may be getting paranoid of course... 4u1e (talk) 18:34, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

SportsPro

It does mention a gift of $300M from Ecclestone! I've started to plough through it though, and it looks like just turning into another tirade against Purnell and Woods - two of the people Rubython's lost libel cases against in the past (although he's also won one against Woods, just to be fair). 4u1e (talk) 19:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

No - according to several other books on Mosley, Max was not in there with them. he did visit occasionally. Hopefully no-one will try to put the ref back. 4u1e (talk) 16:08, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

Your recent edits

Hi there. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. If you can't type the tilde character, you should click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your name and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you! --SineBot (talk) 09:43, 11 July 2008 (UTC)

GA

Hi mate, hope you've not been put off Wikipedia for good by the GA saga on Max Mosley. It's been re-listed as a GA now, so I guess we could think about pushing for FA again! Cheers. 4u1e (talk) 20:57, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

ArbCom elections are now open!

Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current Arbitration Committee election. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on the voting page. For the Election committee, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:58, 23 November 2015 (UTC)