Hi, Ed. I saw your hidden comment; it's one of the two broadside torpedo tube rooms. How do you think I could word that so it's a little more clear? Parsecboy ( talk) 21:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Jappalang raised some concerns about the NHC photos of the ship at the FAC. I figured you might be better able to address their suitability for use here, so if you don't mind lending a hand :) Thanks! Parsecboy ( talk) 03:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I need some help with refs and citations for Glenn Gould. Since you've got plenty of experience at FAC and you've used notes in several of your FA articles, can you pop buy IRC so I can ask you a few questions? Thanks. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 03:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 08:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The
April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, nice to meet you! Thanks for your message in
Talk:ARA Rivadavia, I'd be glad to collaborate with you in the articles related to the argentinian dreadnoughts. I've been gathering some online references, and can also access some books on the subject (unfortunately, in spanish); and have begun typing the articles. My goal was to upload the first version in April'09 , however personal issues have prevented me to do so; now I'm aiming to end of May'09. The scope I've self-set was to improve both the class and the ships articles to a GA level; I'm unsure what you mean with the "DYK" but assume is to include them in the "Main Page" at some time in the future?
Pls let me know your plans. Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk) 23:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
(out) - the BE was the initial start from DPdH. I'd say to go with AE becuase that is what we know; if it's really needed, we could go through and change it later... — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 23:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Orlady ( talk) 08:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I am working on conflicts, background, and equipment sections, but what numbers and what info would I need to add? Thanks, my name inc 19:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Funnily enough I was reading that article the other day during some random browsing. I'll take a look asap. EyeSerene talk 10:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
You're very welcome! :-) Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you remember those NYT links you found back when I had Nassau-class battleship at FAC? I think I figured out why the Germans thought they had sunk Warspite: at around 7:30pm, the ship had been turning away from Valiant to avoid collision, and Kaiser scored a hit that jammed the steering gear, and while the ship was steaming in circles, the German line pummeled her pretty badly. The steering gear couldn't be fixed (enough for her to continue in the battle), and so she withdrew to Rosyth. Apparently the Germans assumed the ship went down. Isn't it fun to figure these things out? :) Parsecboy ( talk) 12:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the much-improved DYK hook on the MTK case. The payment went the other way around (the farmer had been awarded the $25) so I proposed alt2 based on yours. Tempshill ( talk) 15:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have reverted your last edit with a longish note in the edit summary. There is no conroversy about that statement: see old talk about how much damage could be caused. What is in dispute about a battleship wreaking havoc with undefended and slow merchantmen? Would the ship have been sent against convoys if it was at risk from merchant ships? But if there are things you dispute, please add to that section in Talk and see if it adds anything. Regards, bigpad ( talk) 21:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think supporting an article twice in the same nomination is disallowed...
[1]
[2]
Jappalang (
talk) 09:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Hiya ed. I remember that back in January I offered to nominate you for adminship, and you accepted, and MBK co-nomed, and that rfa did not pass. Its about three weeks shy of six months since your first rfa failed, and I was wondering if you had given any thought to taking another stab at it. I'd be happy to nom you again, if you'd like, otherwise I'd by happy to support. How about it? TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Eddie, I can haz c/e work? Just something casual - scary piano comps coming up in a few weeks, and I'm spooked for practice. According to my prof, I have to win...or else. So I'll be a little side dish and the rest of your c/e team can be the main course. ;) — La Pianista ♫ ♪ 03:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(out) - I think you know. :P But I need to go; have a great night and talk to you later! — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Have you considered taking this to AfD as well? I think notability here is no better than on Thomas E. Locke. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 06:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 09:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.
User:Ww2censor has decided that File:ANTI1034.jpg is not sutable for the USS Triton (SSRN-586) article per [3]. I think he/she is missing the forest for the trees. See my talk page for details. Marcd30319 ( talk) 12:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to see the FAC has ended - I did do some work on the background, but never edit much at the weekend (and was reluctant to dive in with at least two other copyeditors at work!). Still, if you head back to FAC and want another pair of eyes over the article first, let me know. EyeSerene talk 10:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed -- Thanks for looking at the AOT article and reranking it. Frankly, I find your assessment rather begrudging and am demotivated, rather than motivated to continue improvments. But, its a lot better than when I started work a week or so ago. Anyway, thanks again. Hartfelt ( talk) 12:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ed, you don't happen to focus on the the land campaigns of World War I at all do you? I need some help at Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which is currently a real mess, and I figured you might have some expertise. It seems a shame that the bloodiest and (by some counts) largest battle in American history should be covered as poorly and inaccurately as it currently is. Got the time to help, or any good resources? Thanks Jrt989 ( talk) 02:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ed. It was pointed out at the Moltke class FAC that this article now exists (it was created on 13 May). It's in pretty poor shape; I'm thinking at some point we should overhaul it. It doesn't need to be a priority or anything, but maybe something for a rainy day :) Parsecboy ( talk) 00:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed: I've done a lot more work on the AOT article, added footnotes, etc. I've pretty much come to where I want to get. Picking up on your offer, I would appreciate some coaching on the MOS issues you see, as looking over the MOS link you provided was not very illuminating for me. If I do say so myself, I think the article is pretty good now and is presented with a consistent style, graphics, lot of references, lot of footnote, lots of Wikilinks, etc. (The only problem is, no one will ever read it if you believe the page view results.) Anyway, thanks for any insight you can give. Hartfelt ( talk) 20:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 20:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.
You are exactly the kind of educationally and intellectually limited person that Wikipedia unfortunately suffers on occasion. However it is good of you to voluntarily excommunicate yourself from the topic; your comments are totally useless. Go and troll somewhere else. B. Fairbairn Talk 23:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed: Have tried to answer the AOT queries you posted. Also, I wanted to ask for MilHist peer review, per you suggestion, but cldn't figure out how to do so, since the page doesn't seem to have the template contemplated by the instructions. (I've queried Parsecboy about that, too.) Thanks again for your interest. Hartfelt ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ed, thanks for the edits/comments on the page! I appreciate getting some feedback from other editors (something I haven't had much of while editing it these last few weeks). Any chance you would be willing to take it to the next level and conduct the GA review for me? I've spent a fair amount of time on this page and would love to get a quick turn around if you're available!
P.S. Quick question: Are the hidden comments intended to be problems you think I need to address, or are they just comments? I ask merely because I haven't encountered them before.
Thanks! Jrt989 ( talk) 16:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I've answered your remark on my discussion page and I've put it on the article's discussion. The actual reason for my contacting you however is this edit:
[ [4]]
I would appreciate your not introducing english orthography in the german wikipedia. Thanks and best regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.79.53 ( talk) 09:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Re (pro)noun: "What is a pronoun?" - "That is a noun that has lost its amateur status" (Calvin&Hobbes) -- 84.177.125.135 ( talk) 19:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Plip!
Per suggestion. Shubinator ( talk) 15:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
In this edit's checkin note you stated "um, if they're generic, it should be easy to find (a) source(s)..... right?" The answer is "no". Generic material of trivial importance to the topic with trivial demonstrability do not need references. For instance, you do not need a reference for "some cameras need photographic film" or "the sun rises in the east". But I'll leave the tag on, because I'm sure the next editor will come along and re-insert it anyway. It appears that everyone has stopped writing actual articles, and editing has degenerated into tagging and AfD fests. Maury Markowitz ( talk) 13:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.
GARDEN , iMatthew : Chat , and The Helpful One The Helpful Bot 00:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello The ed17! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster
Hi, Ed. I saw your hidden comment; it's one of the two broadside torpedo tube rooms. How do you think I could word that so it's a little more clear? Parsecboy ( talk) 21:07, 28 April 2009 (UTC)
Jappalang raised some concerns about the NHC photos of the ship at the FAC. I figured you might be better able to address their suitability for use here, so if you don't mind lending a hand :) Thanks! Parsecboy ( talk) 03:57, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey, I need some help with refs and citations for Glenn Gould. Since you've got plenty of experience at FAC and you've used notes in several of your FA articles, can you pop buy IRC so I can ask you a few questions? Thanks. ɳOCTURNEɳOIR talk // contribs 03:19, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 08:41, 4 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.
| |||
Once again, this month, we have a bumper crop of featured and A-class content, and our heartfelt thanks go to editors who have worked so hard to write these. But with our growth in quality content comes increased demand for reviewers. Which is where you can help. Reviewing is easy and rewarding. You don't need any prior experience and you don't need to write a full review. Any input is helpful so you initially can just comment on what you're comfortable with. Most reviewers start off by focusing one or two things – say, the historical context, or the text, or the references, or the layout, or the images – and as they gain experience, they broaden the scope of the review. You can easily keep up to date with which articles need review, by copying this text – {{ WPMILHIST Review alerts}} – to your userpage or talkpage. Thanks in anticipation, Roger Davies |
New featured articles:
New featured lists:
New featured topics: New featured pictures:
New A-Class articles:
| ||
| |||
| |||
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. |
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot ( talk) 22:33, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
The
April 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:23, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, nice to meet you! Thanks for your message in
Talk:ARA Rivadavia, I'd be glad to collaborate with you in the articles related to the argentinian dreadnoughts. I've been gathering some online references, and can also access some books on the subject (unfortunately, in spanish); and have begun typing the articles. My goal was to upload the first version in April'09 , however personal issues have prevented me to do so; now I'm aiming to end of May'09. The scope I've self-set was to improve both the class and the ships articles to a GA level; I'm unsure what you mean with the "DYK" but assume is to include them in the "Main Page" at some time in the future?
Pls let me know your plans. Kind regards,
DPdH (
talk) 23:15, 4 May 2009 (UTC)
(out) - the BE was the initial start from DPdH. I'd say to go with AE becuase that is what we know; if it's really needed, we could go through and change it later... — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 23:02, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Orlady ( talk) 08:38, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
I am working on conflicts, background, and equipment sections, but what numbers and what info would I need to add? Thanks, my name inc 19:48, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Funnily enough I was reading that article the other day during some random browsing. I'll take a look asap. EyeSerene talk 10:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)
You're very welcome! :-) Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:44, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Do you remember those NYT links you found back when I had Nassau-class battleship at FAC? I think I figured out why the Germans thought they had sunk Warspite: at around 7:30pm, the ship had been turning away from Valiant to avoid collision, and Kaiser scored a hit that jammed the steering gear, and while the ship was steaming in circles, the German line pummeled her pretty badly. The steering gear couldn't be fixed (enough for her to continue in the battle), and so she withdrew to Rosyth. Apparently the Germans assumed the ship went down. Isn't it fun to figure these things out? :) Parsecboy ( talk) 12:08, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Thanks for the much-improved DYK hook on the MTK case. The payment went the other way around (the farmer had been awarded the $25) so I proposed alt2 based on yours. Tempshill ( talk) 15:45, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi, I have reverted your last edit with a longish note in the edit summary. There is no conroversy about that statement: see old talk about how much damage could be caused. What is in dispute about a battleship wreaking havoc with undefended and slow merchantmen? Would the ship have been sent against convoys if it was at risk from merchant ships? But if there are things you dispute, please add to that section in Talk and see if it adds anything. Regards, bigpad ( talk) 21:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed, I appreciate your enthusiasm, but I think supporting an article twice in the same nomination is disallowed...
[1]
[2]
Jappalang (
talk) 09:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Hiya ed. I remember that back in January I offered to nominate you for adminship, and you accepted, and MBK co-nomed, and that rfa did not pass. Its about three weeks shy of six months since your first rfa failed, and I was wondering if you had given any thought to taking another stab at it. I'd be happy to nom you again, if you'd like, otherwise I'd by happy to support. How about it? TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:23, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Eddie, I can haz c/e work? Just something casual - scary piano comps coming up in a few weeks, and I'm spooked for practice. According to my prof, I have to win...or else. So I'll be a little side dish and the rest of your c/e team can be the main course. ;) — La Pianista ♫ ♪ 03:43, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
(out) - I think you know. :P But I need to go; have a great night and talk to you later! — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 03:56, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Have you considered taking this to AfD as well? I think notability here is no better than on Thomas E. Locke. rʨanaɢ talk/ contribs 06:35, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by ROBOTIC GARDEN at 09:18, 18 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors see the talk page.
User:Ww2censor has decided that File:ANTI1034.jpg is not sutable for the USS Triton (SSRN-586) article per [3]. I think he/she is missing the forest for the trees. See my talk page for details. Marcd30319 ( talk) 12:25, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
Sorry to see the FAC has ended - I did do some work on the background, but never edit much at the weekend (and was reluctant to dive in with at least two other copyeditors at work!). Still, if you head back to FAC and want another pair of eyes over the article first, let me know. EyeSerene talk 10:34, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed -- Thanks for looking at the AOT article and reranking it. Frankly, I find your assessment rather begrudging and am demotivated, rather than motivated to continue improvments. But, its a lot better than when I started work a week or so ago. Anyway, thanks again. Hartfelt ( talk) 12:52, 18 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ed, you don't happen to focus on the the land campaigns of World War I at all do you? I need some help at Meuse-Argonne Offensive, which is currently a real mess, and I figured you might have some expertise. It seems a shame that the bloodiest and (by some counts) largest battle in American history should be covered as poorly and inaccurately as it currently is. Got the time to help, or any good resources? Thanks Jrt989 ( talk) 02:17, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi Ed. It was pointed out at the Moltke class FAC that this article now exists (it was created on 13 May). It's in pretty poor shape; I'm thinking at some point we should overhaul it. It doesn't need to be a priority or anything, but maybe something for a rainy day :) Parsecboy ( talk) 00:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed: I've done a lot more work on the AOT article, added footnotes, etc. I've pretty much come to where I want to get. Picking up on your offer, I would appreciate some coaching on the MOS issues you see, as looking over the MOS link you provided was not very illuminating for me. If I do say so myself, I think the article is pretty good now and is presented with a consistent style, graphics, lot of references, lot of footnote, lots of Wikilinks, etc. (The only problem is, no one will ever read it if you believe the page view results.) Anyway, thanks for any insight you can give. Hartfelt ( talk) 20:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
The WikiCup Newsletter | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Delivered for the WikiCup by The Helpful Bot at 20:09, 23 May 2009 (UTC). To report errors leave at message here.
You are exactly the kind of educationally and intellectually limited person that Wikipedia unfortunately suffers on occasion. However it is good of you to voluntarily excommunicate yourself from the topic; your comments are totally useless. Go and troll somewhere else. B. Fairbairn Talk 23:27, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Ed: Have tried to answer the AOT queries you posted. Also, I wanted to ask for MilHist peer review, per you suggestion, but cldn't figure out how to do so, since the page doesn't seem to have the template contemplated by the instructions. (I've queried Parsecboy about that, too.) Thanks again for your interest. Hartfelt ( talk) 15:11, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
Hey Ed, thanks for the edits/comments on the page! I appreciate getting some feedback from other editors (something I haven't had much of while editing it these last few weeks). Any chance you would be willing to take it to the next level and conduct the GA review for me? I've spent a fair amount of time on this page and would love to get a quick turn around if you're available!
P.S. Quick question: Are the hidden comments intended to be problems you think I need to address, or are they just comments? I ask merely because I haven't encountered them before.
Thanks! Jrt989 ( talk) 16:42, 23 May 2009 (UTC)
I've answered your remark on my discussion page and I've put it on the article's discussion. The actual reason for my contacting you however is this edit:
[ [4]]
I would appreciate your not introducing english orthography in the german wikipedia. Thanks and best regards! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.177.79.53 ( talk) 09:29, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
Re (pro)noun: "What is a pronoun?" - "That is a noun that has lost its amateur status" (Calvin&Hobbes) -- 84.177.125.135 ( talk) 19:08, 24 May 2009 (UTC)
Plip!
Per suggestion. Shubinator ( talk) 15:45, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
In this edit's checkin note you stated "um, if they're generic, it should be easy to find (a) source(s)..... right?" The answer is "no". Generic material of trivial importance to the topic with trivial demonstrability do not need references. For instance, you do not need a reference for "some cameras need photographic film" or "the sun rises in the east". But I'll leave the tag on, because I'm sure the next editor will come along and re-insert it anyway. It appears that everyone has stopped writing actual articles, and editing has degenerated into tagging and AfD fests. Maury Markowitz ( talk) 13:14, 25 May 2009 (UTC)
This is just a quick reminder that the round ends this Friday, May 29, 2009. I wanted to let you guys know the current standings. If you are very close, but not close enough, work as hard as possible these next two days. Pool leaders are listed as usual, and under the 10 wildcards, are competitors that are still fighting for a spot. Also, if you currently have any un-reviewed GAN's up and you'd like them to be reviewed and counted for this round, you must place them on the appropriate thread of the WikiCup talk page.
GARDEN , iMatthew : Chat , and The Helpful One The Helpful Bot 00:57, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
FlyingToaster Barnstar
Hello The ed17! Thank you so much for your support in my
recent RfA, which passed with a tally of 126/32/5. I am truly humbled by the trust you placed in me, and will endeavor to live up to that trust.
Flying
Toaster