User talk:Saskoiler

Hi Saskoiler! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Rosiestep (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:24, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Milos Raonic 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 333-blue -- 333-blue (talk) 10:41, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Milos Raonic you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Milos Raonic for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of 333-blue -- 333-blue (talk) 08:40, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

		The Original Barnstar
		For voluntary QPQ reviewing GAN. LavaBaron (talk) 17:06, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The article Milos Raonic you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Milos Raonic 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 333-blue -- 333-blue (talk) 09:21, 16 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

On 4 April 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Milos Raonic, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Milos Raonic is the first tennis player born in the 1990s to win an ATP title, be ranked in the top 10, and qualify for the ATP Finals? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Milos Raonic. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 20:53, 4 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Some of what you did is great, and some are against longstanding and meticulously fought out tennis guidelines. I don't mean to say they are better or worse, but changes such as winner>win, category>level, 500 series>500 would need full scrutiny at Tennis Project. Plus changes such as "level" and "500" would only work with Raonic at this particular point in time because we also have Tour Finals, Grand Slam, and Olympics as categories for other players. Heck you could change win/loss to w/ru to make it smaller still but the fact is you barely save any space because the word "result" and it being sortable wipes out any space savings. Fyunck(click) (talk) 00:06, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyunck(click): Okay. It's very frustrating because [1A] The tennis guidelines are (in my opinion) poorly organized, so it's hard to find anything [1B] My attempt to reorganize the guidelines died on the vine due to lack of interest. [2A] The tennis guidelines are (in my opinion) not self-consistent, and in some cases disagree with MOS and Accessibility guidelines [2B] WP:PROJPAGE makes it clear that WikiProject advice is no more binding than an essay. It is demotivating because I'd like to help improve things, but see no way to do that. - Saskoiler (talk) 01:10, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Standard Wikipedia guidelines also are easily overridden by consensus... I see it all the time. For the most part tennis guidelines do not disagree with MOS. Do I think the guidelines could be better organized...absolutely. But I do recall when you attempted it I didn't think it was any better. But what you attempted to do with this edit would have helped zero with other players and barely helped with Raonic. Winner was no longer than Win when the actual heading is even wider. Same with using "Level" when you still have to squeeze in "Olympics" and "Grand Slam." Fyunck(click) (talk) 01:35, 18 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar, appreciate it! And thanks to you also for your tennis edits, especially on the Milos Raonic article! Great job! JGab12 (talk) 21:33, 20 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

A great job in getting the Raonic article is such terrific shape. You stuck at it with all the suggestions flying this way and that. Just wanted to say thanks. Fyunck(click) (talk) 05:36, 1 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Well done indeed. Good to get another tennis article to FA (after 1877 Wimbledon Championship). It's certainly not the easiest choice to pick an active player because the article will progress significantly over the coming years and it will be challenging to keep it at FA level. But that bridge can be crossed in due time. Good job!--Wolbo (talk) 20:02, 3 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Fyunck(click) and Wolbo: Thank you both for your congratulatory words. I appreciate all that both of you have done to shepherd the collection of Wikipedia tennis articles. I learned a great deal going through the process, and hope to apply the lessons learned to other tennis (and non-tennis) articles. Saskoiler (talk) 23:04, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Canada Tennis

Thank you for quality articles about tennis in Canada and its people, such as Milos Raonic and Kelly Murumets, for reviews for GA, for experimenting to improve the guidelines for tennis articles, - proud Canadian, you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:42, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Gerda Arendt: Thank you so much for your kind words, and for recognizing the variety of small contributions that I've made to Wikipedia. I appreciate the fact that you've noticed. I've learned a great deal these past few months (especially working through FA and GA reviews), and I hope I can continue to have a positive impact. Saskoiler (talk) 23:12, 8 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Three years ago, you were recipient no. 1474 of Precious, a prize of QAI! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 9 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The table structure for Raonic's top 10 wins is incorrect. Table does not resemble ANY other player and all wins should be numbered along the left hand side. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.251.184.52 (talk) 15:06, 8 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, Saskoiler. Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23.59 on Sunday, 10 December. All users who registered an account before Saturday, 28 October 2017, made at least 150 mainspace edits before Wednesday, 1 November 2017 and are not currently blocked are eligible to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2017 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:42, 3 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Saskoiler, not sure if you are back, but if you are... I nominated Kim Clijsters as an FAC a few weeks ago (the first tennis FAC since your nomination of Milos Raonic a few years ago) and was wondering if you could leave comments. I already have two supports, but could use one or two more. Thank you, Sportsfan77777 (talk) 20:58, 7 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! Voting in the 2019 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 on Monday, 2 December 2019. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority 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 in the 2019 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:20, 19 November 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Precious

Four years!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:43, 9 September 2020 (UTC)[reply]