![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
|
Thanks for your efforts to improve the YF-23 while it's at FAC. If it wasn't for you, I'd have no idea how to address the issues. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 00:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I am having an edit war with on Revolution (song) with an unconfirmed user who is repeatedly adding unsourced or in one case falsely sourced material to the good article. I don't know what actions I should take next so any help would be great. Thanks -- MOLEY ( talk) 04:21, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The current Kurt Hummel FAC seems to be stalled. The last comment was on August 26, and there hasn't been any further action on the prose (or anything else, for that matter) since then. I appreciate the offer you made on the 30th; if you could take a look soon, that would be wonderful. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 05:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. It's been a little while since the last message on RfA reform, and there's been a fair amount of slow but steady progress. However, there is currently a flurry of activity due to some conversations on Jimbo's talk page.
I think we're very close to putting an idea or two forward before the community and there are at least two newer ones in the pipeline. So if you have a moment:
Thanks for reading and for any comments that you've now made.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 21:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC).
Dank, I am currently participating in the Guild of Copy Editors September 2011 backlog elimination drive. I feel I could improve in certain aspects of my copy editing skill. You might notice that we are both members of the Military History project and the Guild of Copy Editors. Considering that we have some mutual interests, I would like to know if you are willing to serve as a mentor under the Guild of Copy Editors Mentorship Program to help improve my copy-editing skills. I look forward to your reply. And as an aside, good luck in your Coordinator election. LeonidasSpartan ( talk) 11:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Featured Article promotion |
Because you were a major contributor of the article Northrop YF-23, I'd like to tell you that the article is now an FA! Thank you so much for helping me out, and I think that you should feel as proud as I am right now. Once again, thanks! Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC) |
Dank, where in WP:MOSNUM does it say not to convert units if the article is linked, like for guns? I looked through it and couldn't find anything that specific.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 05:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Don't apologize, it's totally unnecessary. Mistakes are known to happen. :) (And I've been known to make more than my share. 8o ) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 16:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:46, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Judging by your contributions during the last few days, I think you should join me at improving some aircraft articles. I think WP:AIR needs someone who is willing to revamp and expand articles, for which I'm happy to do. But, for my work to succeed, I'd dearly love a group of users around me who would clean up after myself and offer comments and reviews about my work. There are a few people who'd got their hands dirty, such as Kyteto (Avro Vulcan), SynergyStar (Boeing 767), Bzuk, BilCat, Demiurge1000, Fnlayson, and yourself. I think if everyone works together as a team, we can achieve a lot and "go nuclear". I'd appreciate it if you, because of your connections with others, get them to come along. If you wanna chat to me, please go to [1], if you haven't already. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 10:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Dear Dank, thank you for your comments on the recent copy-edit of Boeing 767. I have since been encouraged to take the article to FAC review. At present though, the article is in need of comments for its A-class review; I've already advertised at WP:AVIATION for days now, but had few takers. As someone who's frequented A-class reviews before, and commented on its copy-edit, if you have the chance to drop a comment, suggestions, etc. of any kind, positive, negative, or neutral, that would be appreciated. Regards, SynergyStar ( talk) 02:26, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Dank! I hope you enjoy this home-made cookie of mine as a warm greeting from a fellow military historian. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 03:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC) |
Do you think I'm being excessively demanding of Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil at FAC? Malleus Fatuorum 04:17, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
|
In lieu of Sp33dyphil's cooke, which i almost ate, I present you <russian accent> ouvr national treazur of thi mutherland</russian accent>, baklava! Enjoy! |
DC Meetup 23 & Annual Membership Meeting | |
---|---|
Wikimedia District of Columbia, the newest officially recognized chapter, is holding its Annual Membership Meeting at 1pm on Saturday, October 1, 2011 at the Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Library. ![]() Agenda items include:
Candidate nominations are open until 11:59pm EDT on Saturday, September 24. We encourage you to consider being a candidate. (see see candidate instructions) The meeting is open to both the general public and members from within the DC-MD-VA-WV-DE region and beyond. We encourage everyone to attend! You may join the chapter at the meeting or online. |
Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude
Hello, Dank. I see that you are a member of WP:OMT. I am reminding you that there is a discussion [ here] about whther or not to award Bahamut0013, a member of OMt who passsed awsay a short while ago, the Titan's Cross in silver. your opinion will be welcome. Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 14:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Dank, as usual, you've been doing a great job. You've always very helpful and volunteered to aid even when you were not asked to and that's something which I regard as a very nice trait of yours (I mean it). Unfortunately, I have less and less motives to stay on Wikipedia. FAC seems like a war to me, and not a place where Wikipedians can help each other.
For some reason which I'm not aware, Malleus Fatuorum has grown hostile toward me even though I was not rude to him. Astynax has the right to argue that he believes some changes are not needed. That's not supposed to be an offense. It is true that Astynax did not make a few (I repeat: a few) of the changes Malleus asked for. However, I fixed all remaining issues raised by Malleus which had not been corrected by Astynax nonetheless. Every single edit he made into the article I supported (I even said that I supported the changes in his talk page). Not a single moment I turned to Malleus and said that I would not cooperate. But some of his words were harsh (to say the least) and unnecessary [2] [3] [4] [5] It's sad that for some reason he has shown animosity toward me. I have none to him.
John's behavior can be described as inappropriate at least. He has been vague from the beginning even though I asked him repeatedly to point out what was wrong. He made several changes to the article. By doing that, he removed entire senteces without a a reason and added another one which had no source (into a FAC!). I opposed only the last move he made.
All this is frustrating. Very, very frustrating. Sorry to bother you about this, but I had to talk to someone. Astynax has clearly stepped back seeing how hostile some of the reviewers have become and I'm pretty much by my own (as usual) now. Thnaks for everything, anyway. -- Lecen ( talk) 18:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Several people have asked to work with me on copyediting, including some running in the current Milhist coordinator elections, and some have asked for copyediting help. Rather than assigning work, I'm pointing several people to this notice so that people can ask for help and offer help if they want to. - Dank ( push to talk) 21:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I've taken your advice and posted an A-class review request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Vukovar. If there's anything you can do to get it off the ground it would be much appreciated. Prioryman ( talk) 22:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Is in morning. I don't know how well, but I presume you knew User:Bahamut0013. Condolences are compiling if you have a thought to share. Damn!-- My76Strat ( talk) 23:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Civility Barnstar |
From the beginning to the very end of the FAC process in the article which I nominated you were polite, helpful and reasonable. You certainly deserve this small token of gratitude. Lecen ( talk) 23:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Dank, I'm working on the Tu-142 right now at my sandbox. I invite you to participate in the development of the article, so less work would be done down the track and that you and Ian Rose will both feel central to its development. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 06:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I noticed you open a discussion on the need for the position. I wanted to let you know I replied, and posted some relevant information relating to the position and my questions concerning it in my reply. I'm just about set to head to the University, but I will be back on here later this evening, so if you reply I will get to it either later tonight or early tomorrow (Like between 00:00 and 05:00). TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I was getting increasingly worried at the lack of comments on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Vukovar but I see that someone has now finally posted something. However, it's still pretty small stuff and it's noticeable that more recently posted requests have received far more detailed reviews. Do you think you would be able to do a review any time soon? Prioryman ( talk) 17:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
RfA reform: ...and what you can do now.
|
---|
(You are receiving this message because you are either a task force member, or you have contributed to recent discussions on any of these pages.) The number of nominations continues to nosedive seriously, according to these monthly figures. We know why this is, and if the trend continues our reserve of active admins will soon be underwater. Wikipedia now needs suitable editors to come forward. This can only be achieved either through changes to the current system, a radical alternative, or by fiat from elsewhere. A lot of work is constantly being done behind the scenes by the coordinators and task force members, such as monitoring the talk pages, discussing new ideas, organising the project pages, researching statistics and keeping them up to date. You'll also see for example that we have recently made tables to compare how other Wikipedias choose their sysops, and some tools have been developed to more closely examine !voters' habits. The purpose of WP:RFA2011 is to focus attention on specific issues of our admin selection process and to develop RfC proposals for solutions to improve them. For this, we have organised the project into dedicated sections each with their own discussion pages. It is important to understand that all Wikipedia policy changes take a long time to implement whether or not the discussions appear to be active - getting the proposals right before offering them for discussion by the broader community is crucial to the success of any RfC. Consider keeping the pages and their talk pages on your watchlist; do check out older threads before starting a new one on topics that have been discussed already, and if you start a new thread, please revisit it regularly to follow up on new comments. The object of WP:RFA2011 is not to make it either easier or harder to become an admin - those criteria are set by those who !vote at each RfA. By providing a unique venue for developing ideas for change independent of the general discussion at WT:RFA, the project has two clearly defined goals:
The fastest way is through improvement to the current system. Workspace is however also available within the project pages to suggest and discuss ideas that are not strictly within the remit of this project. Users are invited to make use of these pages where they will offer maximum exposure to the broader community, rather than individual projects in user space. We already know what's wrong with RfA - let's not clutter the project with perennial chat. RFA2011 is now ready to propose some of the elements of reform, and all the task force needs to do now is to pre-draft those proposals in the project's workspace, agree on the wording, and then offer them for central discussion where the entire Wikipedia community will be more than welcome to express their opinions in order to build consensus. New tool Check your RfA !voting history! Since the editors' RfA !vote counter at X!-Tools has been down for a long while, we now have a new RfA Vote Counter to replace it. A significant improvement on the former tool, it provides a a complete breakdown of an editor's RfA votes, together with an analysis of the participant's voting pattern. Are you ready to help? Although the main engine of RFA2011 is its task force, constructive comments from any editors are always welcome on the project's various talk pages. The main reasons why WT:RfA was never successful in getting anything done are that threads on different aspects of RfA are all mixed together, and are then archived where nobody remembers them and where they are hard to find - the same is true of ad hoc threads on the founder's talk page. |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 15:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC).
I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as the lead coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!
As always, if you have any questions or concerns please don't hesitate to ask me directly. Kirill [talk] [prof] 02:06, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators.
MisterBee1966 (
talk)
07:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really. | |
---|---|
![]() |
You are invited to the National Archives in College Park for a special backstage pass and scanathon meetup with Archivist of the United States David Ferriero, on Saturday, October 8. Go behind the scenes and into the stacks at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Free catered lunch provided! Dominic· t 16:04, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Dank, I'm not sure if you're aware of it, but MilHist's got an IRC channel at [6]. Please join the IRC and tell others to come along because it's almost deserted. I'd like to talk directly to you about guidance and my plans in general. Thanks Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm in no particular hurry now, but I wonder whether you think it would be a good idea to relist now, based on the fact that for today, tomorrow and Sunday I'll be active, before a week of limited activity. I wonder also whether you think that "I own Beevor and did some spotchecks on citations to his book. They're fine and don't misrepresent the material, nor are they straight quotes" (SnowFire) is likely to count as a source review: I took some scans of books I'll return probably tomorrow just in case. Thanks, Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 15:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Congrats on your election as Lead Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy ( talk) 22:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Featured article candidacies and A-Class reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Cheers, Buggie111 ( talk) 13:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
I was only peripherally interested in this article at first, now I am invested in it after this exchange. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC).
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 20:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC).
Thanks very much for all your help in the Battle of Vukovar A-class review. I've renominated it for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Vukovar/archive2. Please feel free to comment there. Prioryman ( talk) 18:38, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey Dank, I see you were a reviewer at one of Sevastopol's many reviews. As it's last FAC was closed due to low participation, I"d like you to come and review it for it's current FAC, in order to get a better picture of its current situation. Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 02:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I couldn't find your findings on the spotchecks. I think the delegates are waiting for you or something. Have I missed something? Cheers Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 08:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
In your edit of 15:19 today you changed "In the first quarter of the century the gardens acquired a bandstand, a German field gun and tank from the First World War, though these were removed by 1961." to "... bandstand and a German field gun and tank...". This reads as three items rather than the intended single and pair, reinforced by the multiple "and"s. Would you accept: "... acquired a bandstand and German trophies from World War I: a field gun and a tank. The latter two were removed by 1961 and the former is now only a concrete base."? I've raised this on your talk page privately in deference to your seniority, as a newbie I'm adverse to engaging in public spats! Martin of Sheffield ( talk) 14:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your earlier review. Would you be able to take another look at the article to see how it is progressing? I'm conscious that it hasn't reached a consensus yet and it won't be long before the review closes. Harrison49 ( talk) 18:55, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on your election!! It is extraordinary that with all your responsibilities you have done such careful editing work on my humongous article. I applaud all 10 of your recent edits (some I am embarrassed for not having caught myself); the only one that hurts is losing my capital-P Prison - it's so evocative - but I understand about house style, and reading Gmcbjames's comments on my article just now sure underscores that for me.
I also followed your advice and rewrote the first two sentences of the "Radical Middle Newsletter" sub-section; basically, communism is out, prosperity is in. The lead is much more neutral now, thus a much less distracting way of setting the context (I hope).
Tonight I'll take more of your advice and put it up for peer review. I can't wait to see what happens there, though I fear the article (like its subject) will always be unsettling to its readers. Here's to getting it FAC-ready by the end of the month. - Babel41 ( talk) 01:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
The tag is quite OK with me :) I'd appreciate if you reviewed the article at FAC. Vladimir ( talk) 11:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I already replied there, but I must say at more length here how pleased I was to read this. Thank you; you're somebody I really respect so getting a compliment from you is a big deal. Cheers, -- John ( talk) 04:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
|
I won't have time to copyedit articles at A-class for the next two months or so. I'll be happy to copyedit any FAC articles that have passed A-class and that look like they have a shot at passing FAC, if you'll check the items on the Checklist first. Thanks. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
...has been promoted. Very many thanks indeed for all the work that went into the copyediting on this one over the last year! Hope all's well, Hchc2009 ( talk) 18:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Made all the fixes you requested at this FAC. Because of its age I hoped you could get back to it as soon as possible. — Ed! (talk) 03:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Some stuff on the Elbasan Script, which is not related to Vladimir. Futbollisti ( talk) 18:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
An issue with which you've been involved is under discussion. DrKiernan ( talk) 15:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
If you're up for a chat, I just got a microphone for my computer, so it should be free! I just added someone on Skype whom I suspect is you. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Dank, I'm trying to add a page for Pragmatic Works. But searching for the article, I bumped into this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_Works (note: w in Works is in upper case)and it says the page has been deleted. It seems someone else has tried creating the page and it got deleted due to copyright infringement and unambiguous advertising. As part of the corporate page on wiki, I was forced to use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_works (w in works is in lower case) instead of the other valid one. Can you help me use the older page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_Works for putting the page contents from the current page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_works. Appreciate your time. GeekyPuppy ( talk) 07:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Do you know why the Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Military history articles by quality log hasn't been updated in a week?-- MOLEY ( talk) 18:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dank, while you requested a script function to check and correct duplicate links on FA talk, i was writing a little REXX script to analyze a complete Wiki-article and generate some result lists with possible link problems (i certainly lack the skills to code the "automatic correction" part of that function :), but the script provides a useful checklist). I am pretty content with the actual status of it, but would be glad to have another pair of eyes to look over it and offer some fresh input for improvements.
Installation and handling is relatively easy, i would provide you with some additional information of course. If you have the time, would you be interested in beta-testing such a script? Regards. GermanJoe ( talk) 20:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I think there may be a problem with RAF Uxbridge's FAC, as the nominator already has Ickenham at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 00:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for working on the article, a shame that its been taken down from FAC for now. I've started fixing it up some more, but that will take me a couple days as I've got university work to deal with this week. I should have the article all finished by the weekend though. Thanks. Kaiser matias ( talk) 01:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dank, I'm not sure about your oppose to the FAC because you're not being really clear whether the article fails any of the FA criteria. "There's too much to do here and I'm not going to have much time to spare until December." Are you saying that there are too many mistakes for the article to be viable, or have you just given in to Sandy's comments? If you think the article is salvageable and that the problems are minor, I'd love to have your oppose taken back and replaced with "neutral" (which is not common in FACs) or "comments". I really think you're opposing because you don't have much time going over the article. Sp33dyphil © • © 07:27, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 02:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
What you said is mostly true, except in limited cases like the current state of affairs with AV articles (and that's also partly because of the overlap between AV and MH that occurs there - it was once similar with Ships). I think though that I'm in a slightly different position because AFAICT the delegates don't consider me a "Milhist reviewer" so much as a "reviewer" - I was active at FAC long before I became active at Milhist, and I work with a wide variety of topics there. Nikkimaria ( talk) 17:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
...a while ago you asked about copyediting articles for the tropical cyclone WikiProject. So here's one for you — Hurricane Igor (failed at FAC due to a lack of copyediting) HurricaneFan 25 17:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dank and congratulations on becoming Lead of MILHIST! I was hoping you would have some time for an interview for the our newsletter, The Right Stuff. Just a few questions about what makes a wikiproject successful. If you're available I'll give you a wikilink. Thanks! – Lionel ( talk) 01:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Thanks for all your assistance with Battle of Vukovar, which has benefitted enormously from your expertise in copyediting! Prioryman ( talk) 19:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC) |
Invitation from the
Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their November 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles (and specifically will be targeting the oldest three months), as we want to copy edit as many of these as possible. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters. |
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Dank, you may want to clarify what you meant by "But there are minefields at FAC, and if articles seem to blow up at FAC, then I totally agree that it's best to stay away." Is that aimed at individual editors, articles or the project in general? Nigel Ish ( talk) 15:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Sp33dyphil has given you some
caramel and a
candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun
Halloween treats, and promote
WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{ subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message! |
![]() |
-- Sp33dyphil © • © 05:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC & edit-a-thon | |
---|---|
![]() Wikipedia Loves Libraries comes to DC on Saturday, November 5th, from 1-5pm, at the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial Library. We will be holding an edit-a-thon, working together to improve Wikipedia content related to DC history, arts, civil rights, or whatever suits your interests. There may also be opportunities to help with scanning historic photos plus some swag! You're invited and we hope to see you there! | |
Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot ( talk) 18:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude
![]() | This page is an archive of past discussions. 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. |
|
Thanks for your efforts to improve the YF-23 while it's at FAC. If it wasn't for you, I'd have no idea how to address the issues. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 00:22, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
I am having an edit war with on Revolution (song) with an unconfirmed user who is repeatedly adding unsourced or in one case falsely sourced material to the good article. I don't know what actions I should take next so any help would be great. Thanks -- MOLEY ( talk) 04:21, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
The current Kurt Hummel FAC seems to be stalled. The last comment was on August 26, and there hasn't been any further action on the prose (or anything else, for that matter) since then. I appreciate the offer you made on the 30th; if you could take a look soon, that would be wonderful. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 05:58, 5 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi. It's been a little while since the last message on RfA reform, and there's been a fair amount of slow but steady progress. However, there is currently a flurry of activity due to some conversations on Jimbo's talk page.
I think we're very close to putting an idea or two forward before the community and there are at least two newer ones in the pipeline. So if you have a moment:
Thanks for reading and for any comments that you've now made.
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 21:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC).
Dank, I am currently participating in the Guild of Copy Editors September 2011 backlog elimination drive. I feel I could improve in certain aspects of my copy editing skill. You might notice that we are both members of the Military History project and the Guild of Copy Editors. Considering that we have some mutual interests, I would like to know if you are willing to serve as a mentor under the Guild of Copy Editors Mentorship Program to help improve my copy-editing skills. I look forward to your reply. And as an aside, good luck in your Coordinator election. LeonidasSpartan ( talk) 11:10, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Featured Article promotion |
Because you were a major contributor of the article Northrop YF-23, I'd like to tell you that the article is now an FA! Thank you so much for helping me out, and I think that you should feel as proud as I am right now. Once again, thanks! Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:02, 10 September 2011 (UTC) |
Dank, where in WP:MOSNUM does it say not to convert units if the article is linked, like for guns? I looked through it and couldn't find anything that specific.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 05:07, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Don't apologize, it's totally unnecessary. Mistakes are known to happen. :) (And I've been known to make more than my share. 8o ) TREKphiler any time you're ready, Uhura 16:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 17:46, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Judging by your contributions during the last few days, I think you should join me at improving some aircraft articles. I think WP:AIR needs someone who is willing to revamp and expand articles, for which I'm happy to do. But, for my work to succeed, I'd dearly love a group of users around me who would clean up after myself and offer comments and reviews about my work. There are a few people who'd got their hands dirty, such as Kyteto (Avro Vulcan), SynergyStar (Boeing 767), Bzuk, BilCat, Demiurge1000, Fnlayson, and yourself. I think if everyone works together as a team, we can achieve a lot and "go nuclear". I'd appreciate it if you, because of your connections with others, get them to come along. If you wanna chat to me, please go to [1], if you haven't already. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 10:26, 13 September 2011 (UTC)
Dear Dank, thank you for your comments on the recent copy-edit of Boeing 767. I have since been encouraged to take the article to FAC review. At present though, the article is in need of comments for its A-class review; I've already advertised at WP:AVIATION for days now, but had few takers. As someone who's frequented A-class reviews before, and commented on its copy-edit, if you have the chance to drop a comment, suggestions, etc. of any kind, positive, negative, or neutral, that would be appreciated. Regards, SynergyStar ( talk) 02:26, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Hello Dank! I hope you enjoy this home-made cookie of mine as a warm greeting from a fellow military historian. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 03:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC) |
Do you think I'm being excessively demanding of Afonso, Prince Imperial of Brazil at FAC? Malleus Fatuorum 04:17, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
|
In lieu of Sp33dyphil's cooke, which i almost ate, I present you <russian accent> ouvr national treazur of thi mutherland</russian accent>, baklava! Enjoy! |
DC Meetup 23 & Annual Membership Meeting | |
---|---|
Wikimedia District of Columbia, the newest officially recognized chapter, is holding its Annual Membership Meeting at 1pm on Saturday, October 1, 2011 at the Tenley-Friendship Neighborhood Library. ![]() Agenda items include:
Candidate nominations are open until 11:59pm EDT on Saturday, September 24. We encourage you to consider being a candidate. (see see candidate instructions) The meeting is open to both the general public and members from within the DC-MD-VA-WV-DE region and beyond. We encourage everyone to attend! You may join the chapter at the meeting or online. |
Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot, on behalf of User:Aude
Hello, Dank. I see that you are a member of WP:OMT. I am reminding you that there is a discussion [ here] about whther or not to award Bahamut0013, a member of OMt who passsed awsay a short while ago, the Titan's Cross in silver. your opinion will be welcome. Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 14:03, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Dank, as usual, you've been doing a great job. You've always very helpful and volunteered to aid even when you were not asked to and that's something which I regard as a very nice trait of yours (I mean it). Unfortunately, I have less and less motives to stay on Wikipedia. FAC seems like a war to me, and not a place where Wikipedians can help each other.
For some reason which I'm not aware, Malleus Fatuorum has grown hostile toward me even though I was not rude to him. Astynax has the right to argue that he believes some changes are not needed. That's not supposed to be an offense. It is true that Astynax did not make a few (I repeat: a few) of the changes Malleus asked for. However, I fixed all remaining issues raised by Malleus which had not been corrected by Astynax nonetheless. Every single edit he made into the article I supported (I even said that I supported the changes in his talk page). Not a single moment I turned to Malleus and said that I would not cooperate. But some of his words were harsh (to say the least) and unnecessary [2] [3] [4] [5] It's sad that for some reason he has shown animosity toward me. I have none to him.
John's behavior can be described as inappropriate at least. He has been vague from the beginning even though I asked him repeatedly to point out what was wrong. He made several changes to the article. By doing that, he removed entire senteces without a a reason and added another one which had no source (into a FAC!). I opposed only the last move he made.
All this is frustrating. Very, very frustrating. Sorry to bother you about this, but I had to talk to someone. Astynax has clearly stepped back seeing how hostile some of the reviewers have become and I'm pretty much by my own (as usual) now. Thnaks for everything, anyway. -- Lecen ( talk) 18:41, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Several people have asked to work with me on copyediting, including some running in the current Milhist coordinator elections, and some have asked for copyediting help. Rather than assigning work, I'm pointing several people to this notice so that people can ask for help and offer help if they want to. - Dank ( push to talk) 21:17, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
I've taken your advice and posted an A-class review request at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Vukovar. If there's anything you can do to get it off the ground it would be much appreciated. Prioryman ( talk) 22:32, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Is in morning. I don't know how well, but I presume you knew User:Bahamut0013. Condolences are compiling if you have a thought to share. Damn!-- My76Strat ( talk) 23:55, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The Civility Barnstar |
From the beginning to the very end of the FAC process in the article which I nominated you were polite, helpful and reasonable. You certainly deserve this small token of gratitude. Lecen ( talk) 23:09, 20 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Dank, I'm working on the Tu-142 right now at my sandbox. I invite you to participate in the development of the article, so less work would be done down the track and that you and Ian Rose will both feel central to its development. Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 06:07, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I noticed you open a discussion on the need for the position. I wanted to let you know I replied, and posted some relevant information relating to the position and my questions concerning it in my reply. I'm just about set to head to the University, but I will be back on here later this evening, so if you reply I will get to it either later tonight or early tomorrow (Like between 00:00 and 05:00). TomStar81 ( Talk) 23:08, 21 September 2011 (UTC)
I was getting increasingly worried at the lack of comments on Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Battle of Vukovar but I see that someone has now finally posted something. However, it's still pretty small stuff and it's noticeable that more recently posted requests have received far more detailed reviews. Do you think you would be able to do a review any time soon? Prioryman ( talk) 17:27, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
RfA reform: ...and what you can do now.
|
---|
(You are receiving this message because you are either a task force member, or you have contributed to recent discussions on any of these pages.) The number of nominations continues to nosedive seriously, according to these monthly figures. We know why this is, and if the trend continues our reserve of active admins will soon be underwater. Wikipedia now needs suitable editors to come forward. This can only be achieved either through changes to the current system, a radical alternative, or by fiat from elsewhere. A lot of work is constantly being done behind the scenes by the coordinators and task force members, such as monitoring the talk pages, discussing new ideas, organising the project pages, researching statistics and keeping them up to date. You'll also see for example that we have recently made tables to compare how other Wikipedias choose their sysops, and some tools have been developed to more closely examine !voters' habits. The purpose of WP:RFA2011 is to focus attention on specific issues of our admin selection process and to develop RfC proposals for solutions to improve them. For this, we have organised the project into dedicated sections each with their own discussion pages. It is important to understand that all Wikipedia policy changes take a long time to implement whether or not the discussions appear to be active - getting the proposals right before offering them for discussion by the broader community is crucial to the success of any RfC. Consider keeping the pages and their talk pages on your watchlist; do check out older threads before starting a new one on topics that have been discussed already, and if you start a new thread, please revisit it regularly to follow up on new comments. The object of WP:RFA2011 is not to make it either easier or harder to become an admin - those criteria are set by those who !vote at each RfA. By providing a unique venue for developing ideas for change independent of the general discussion at WT:RFA, the project has two clearly defined goals:
The fastest way is through improvement to the current system. Workspace is however also available within the project pages to suggest and discuss ideas that are not strictly within the remit of this project. Users are invited to make use of these pages where they will offer maximum exposure to the broader community, rather than individual projects in user space. We already know what's wrong with RfA - let's not clutter the project with perennial chat. RFA2011 is now ready to propose some of the elements of reform, and all the task force needs to do now is to pre-draft those proposals in the project's workspace, agree on the wording, and then offer them for central discussion where the entire Wikipedia community will be more than welcome to express their opinions in order to build consensus. New tool Check your RfA !voting history! Since the editors' RfA !vote counter at X!-Tools has been down for a long while, we now have a new RfA Vote Counter to replace it. A significant improvement on the former tool, it provides a a complete breakdown of an editor's RfA votes, together with an analysis of the participant's voting pattern. Are you ready to help? Although the main engine of RFA2011 is its task force, constructive comments from any editors are always welcome on the project's various talk pages. The main reasons why WT:RfA was never successful in getting anything done are that threads on different aspects of RfA are all mixed together, and are then archived where nobody remembers them and where they are hard to find - the same is true of ad hoc threads on the founder's talk page. |
Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of RfA reform 2011 at 15:54, 25 September 2011 (UTC).
I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as the lead coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!
As always, if you have any questions or concerns please don't hesitate to ask me directly. Kirill [talk] [prof] 02:06, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators.
MisterBee1966 (
talk)
07:53, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
National Archives Backstage Pass - Who should come? You should. Really. | |
---|---|
![]() |
You are invited to the National Archives in College Park for a special backstage pass and scanathon meetup with Archivist of the United States David Ferriero, on Saturday, October 8. Go behind the scenes and into the stacks at the National Archives, help digitize documents, and edit together! Free catered lunch provided! Dominic· t 16:04, 29 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Dank, I'm not sure if you're aware of it, but MilHist's got an IRC channel at [6]. Please join the IRC and tell others to come along because it's almost deserted. I'd like to talk directly to you about guidance and my plans in general. Thanks Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 23:34, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I'm in no particular hurry now, but I wonder whether you think it would be a good idea to relist now, based on the fact that for today, tomorrow and Sunday I'll be active, before a week of limited activity. I wonder also whether you think that "I own Beevor and did some spotchecks on citations to his book. They're fine and don't misrepresent the material, nor are they straight quotes" (SnowFire) is likely to count as a source review: I took some scans of books I'll return probably tomorrow just in case. Thanks, Grandiose ( me, talk, contribs) 15:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Congrats on your election as Lead Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy ( talk) 22:01, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Featured article candidacies and A-Class reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. Cheers, Buggie111 ( talk) 13:38, 1 October 2011 (UTC) |
I was only peripherally interested in this article at first, now I am invested in it after this exchange. FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 16:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC).
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 20:31, 1 October 2011 (UTC).
Thanks very much for all your help in the Battle of Vukovar A-class review. I've renominated it for FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Battle of Vukovar/archive2. Please feel free to comment there. Prioryman ( talk) 18:38, 3 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey Dank, I see you were a reviewer at one of Sevastopol's many reviews. As it's last FAC was closed due to low participation, I"d like you to come and review it for it's current FAC, in order to get a better picture of its current situation. Thanks, Buggie111 ( talk) 02:17, 4 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello, I couldn't find your findings on the spotchecks. I think the delegates are waiting for you or something. Have I missed something? Cheers Sp33dyphil " Ad astra" 08:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
In your edit of 15:19 today you changed "In the first quarter of the century the gardens acquired a bandstand, a German field gun and tank from the First World War, though these were removed by 1961." to "... bandstand and a German field gun and tank...". This reads as three items rather than the intended single and pair, reinforced by the multiple "and"s. Would you accept: "... acquired a bandstand and German trophies from World War I: a field gun and a tank. The latter two were removed by 1961 and the former is now only a concrete base."? I've raised this on your talk page privately in deference to your seniority, as a newbie I'm adverse to engaging in public spats! Martin of Sheffield ( talk) 14:48, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for your earlier review. Would you be able to take another look at the article to see how it is progressing? I'm conscious that it hasn't reached a consensus yet and it won't be long before the review closes. Harrison49 ( talk) 18:55, 5 October 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations on your election!! It is extraordinary that with all your responsibilities you have done such careful editing work on my humongous article. I applaud all 10 of your recent edits (some I am embarrassed for not having caught myself); the only one that hurts is losing my capital-P Prison - it's so evocative - but I understand about house style, and reading Gmcbjames's comments on my article just now sure underscores that for me.
I also followed your advice and rewrote the first two sentences of the "Radical Middle Newsletter" sub-section; basically, communism is out, prosperity is in. The lead is much more neutral now, thus a much less distracting way of setting the context (I hope).
Tonight I'll take more of your advice and put it up for peer review. I can't wait to see what happens there, though I fear the article (like its subject) will always be unsettling to its readers. Here's to getting it FAC-ready by the end of the month. - Babel41 ( talk) 01:30, 7 October 2011 (UTC)
The tag is quite OK with me :) I'd appreciate if you reviewed the article at FAC. Vladimir ( talk) 11:31, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
I already replied there, but I must say at more length here how pleased I was to read this. Thank you; you're somebody I really respect so getting a compliment from you is a big deal. Cheers, -- John ( talk) 04:16, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
|
I won't have time to copyedit articles at A-class for the next two months or so. I'll be happy to copyedit any FAC articles that have passed A-class and that look like they have a shot at passing FAC, if you'll check the items on the Checklist first. Thanks. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:04, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
...has been promoted. Very many thanks indeed for all the work that went into the copyediting on this one over the last year! Hope all's well, Hchc2009 ( talk) 18:52, 15 October 2011 (UTC)
Made all the fixes you requested at this FAC. Because of its age I hoped you could get back to it as soon as possible. — Ed! (talk) 03:30, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
Some stuff on the Elbasan Script, which is not related to Vladimir. Futbollisti ( talk) 18:10, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
An issue with which you've been involved is under discussion. DrKiernan ( talk) 15:36, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
If you're up for a chat, I just got a microphone for my computer, so it should be free! I just added someone on Skype whom I suspect is you. :) HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 01:35, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Dank, I'm trying to add a page for Pragmatic Works. But searching for the article, I bumped into this page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_Works (note: w in Works is in upper case)and it says the page has been deleted. It seems someone else has tried creating the page and it got deleted due to copyright infringement and unambiguous advertising. As part of the corporate page on wiki, I was forced to use http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_works (w in works is in lower case) instead of the other valid one. Can you help me use the older page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_Works for putting the page contents from the current page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pragmatic_works. Appreciate your time. GeekyPuppy ( talk) 07:01, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Do you know why the Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Military history articles by quality log hasn't been updated in a week?-- MOLEY ( talk) 18:55, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dank, while you requested a script function to check and correct duplicate links on FA talk, i was writing a little REXX script to analyze a complete Wiki-article and generate some result lists with possible link problems (i certainly lack the skills to code the "automatic correction" part of that function :), but the script provides a useful checklist). I am pretty content with the actual status of it, but would be glad to have another pair of eyes to look over it and offer some fresh input for improvements.
Installation and handling is relatively easy, i would provide you with some additional information of course. If you have the time, would you be interested in beta-testing such a script? Regards. GermanJoe ( talk) 20:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
I think there may be a problem with RAF Uxbridge's FAC, as the nominator already has Ickenham at FAC. Malleus Fatuorum 00:51, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for working on the article, a shame that its been taken down from FAC for now. I've started fixing it up some more, but that will take me a couple days as I've got university work to deal with this week. I should have the article all finished by the weekend though. Thanks. Kaiser matias ( talk) 01:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
Hi Dank, I'm not sure about your oppose to the FAC because you're not being really clear whether the article fails any of the FA criteria. "There's too much to do here and I'm not going to have much time to spare until December." Are you saying that there are too many mistakes for the article to be viable, or have you just given in to Sandy's comments? If you think the article is salvageable and that the problems are minor, I'd love to have your oppose taken back and replaced with "neutral" (which is not common in FACs) or "comments". I really think you're opposing because you don't have much time going over the article. Sp33dyphil © • © 07:27, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot ( talk) 02:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
What you said is mostly true, except in limited cases like the current state of affairs with AV articles (and that's also partly because of the overlap between AV and MH that occurs there - it was once similar with Ships). I think though that I'm in a slightly different position because AFAICT the delegates don't consider me a "Milhist reviewer" so much as a "reviewer" - I was active at FAC long before I became active at Milhist, and I work with a wide variety of topics there. Nikkimaria ( talk) 17:07, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
...a while ago you asked about copyediting articles for the tropical cyclone WikiProject. So here's one for you — Hurricane Igor (failed at FAC due to a lack of copyediting) HurricaneFan 25 17:38, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Dank and congratulations on becoming Lead of MILHIST! I was hoping you would have some time for an interview for the our newsletter, The Right Stuff. Just a few questions about what makes a wikiproject successful. If you're available I'll give you a wikilink. Thanks! – Lionel ( talk) 01:38, 28 October 2011 (UTC)
|
The Copyeditor's Barnstar | |
Thanks for all your assistance with Battle of Vukovar, which has benefitted enormously from your expertise in copyediting! Prioryman ( talk) 19:04, 28 October 2011 (UTC) |
Invitation from the
Guild of Copy Editors
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their November 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles (and specifically will be targeting the oldest three months), as we want to copy edit as many of these as possible. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters. |
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:56, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Dank, you may want to clarify what you meant by "But there are minefields at FAC, and if articles seem to blow up at FAC, then I totally agree that it's best to stay away." Is that aimed at individual editors, articles or the project in general? Nigel Ish ( talk) 15:12, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Sp33dyphil has given you some
caramel and a
candy apple! Caramel and candy-coated apples are fun
Halloween treats, and promote
WikiLove on Halloween. Hopefully these have made your Halloween (and the proceeding days) much sweeter. Happy Halloween!
If Trick-or-treaters come your way, add {{ subst:Halloween apples}} to their talkpage with a spoooooky message! |
![]() |
-- Sp33dyphil © • © 05:35, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
Wikipedia Loves Libraries DC & edit-a-thon | |
---|---|
![]() Wikipedia Loves Libraries comes to DC on Saturday, November 5th, from 1-5pm, at the Martin Luther King Jr Memorial Library. We will be holding an edit-a-thon, working together to improve Wikipedia content related to DC history, arts, civil rights, or whatever suits your interests. There may also be opportunities to help with scanning historic photos plus some swag! You're invited and we hope to see you there! | |
Note: You can remove your name from the DC meetup invite list here. -- Message delivered by AudeBot ( talk) 18:40, 31 October 2011 (UTC), on behalf of User:Aude