![]() | 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. |
Hello! Your submission of
Mathos at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
17:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Can you explain me why you reverted this edit made by me. [1] Thank you. Empire AS Talk! 02:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- DePiep ( talk) 00:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Cheers.
Gog the Mild ( talk) 14:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I do not wish to ...- the answer is yes. (I missed this question earlier on). Anyway, by directly pointing to a MOS my question might be clear anyway, and the fact that I appear on your talkpage is proof of the "D" you ask for. So why would you do so? If you have an IAR at hand then say so. (And please stop nagging about non-existant differences between "claim" and "edit-summarising" and "straightout stating by editing"). - DePiep ( talk) 10:25, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
You take issue with my assertion that diplomatic considerations and naval engagement occupied the first few years of the Hundred Years' War ("No, it didn't") and ask for a source. It is Hundred_Years'_War#Beginning_of_the_war:_1337–1360. While the phrase inserted is a simplification, of course (it's not easy distilling eight years into fourteen words), leaping directly from the start of the war in 1337 to Edward's sailing in 1345 a sentence later begs the question (in the vernacular sense) of what was happening all that time. Something is needed; if you'd care to try your hand at it, I'd be happy for an improvement in the article. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 15:40, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
-- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 18:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Piledhigheranddeeper: change made. You may wish to check it over. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog! If you got some time, there are articles in need of descriptions @ Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Featured content. On a completely unrelated note, I've noticed that the MILHIST folks are looking for new-ish people to run for co-ord this time around. I'd be willing to put myself forward-- do you think I'd be a good candidate/it's worth running? I don't have my heart set on it one way or another. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 22:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
23:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
01:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
The article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno 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:Hasdrubal, son of Hanno for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
19:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I hope you're keeping well. I recently created Viet Cong and People’s Army of Vietnam terror in the Vietnam War. I shamelessly copied over the Overview section from various Wikipages, I don't think it reads very well, but I'm having a mental block on how to rewrite/reorganise it. Would you mind taking a look at it when you have some time? best regards Mztourist ( talk) 09:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
I thought that the hook you preferred for United States war plans (1945–1950) (... that in a 1949 war plan, the United States targeted 70 Soviet cities with 133 nuclear weapons, of which eight would be dropped on Moscow and seven on Leningrad?) was a bit lame, given that a present-day Trident submarine carries 192 x 400 Kt warheads and could easily carry out this program by itself. But I was wrong; the article received 12,717 page views, which is awesome for a non-lead hook. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
The article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Hasdrubal, son of Hanno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
02:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ticinus 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Mathos 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
17:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Third Punic War 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
21:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
On 1 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mathos, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the army he served in mutinied, Mathos became the leader of a 90,000-strong force in a war against ancient Carthage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mathos. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Mathos), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk), Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ticinus 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:Battle of Ticinus for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ticinus you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ticinus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
On 3 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Dunbar (1650), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that having routed their Scottish opponents at the Battle of Dunbar 370 years ago today, the cavalry of the English New Model Army sang the 117th Psalm? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Dunbar (1650). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Dunbar (1650)), 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.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog, has been a while. I started working on an article about body armour in the 18th century, but I probably won't be able to finish it. Would you like to take care of it? Regards, LeGabrie ( talk) 17:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ibera 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
02:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of the Bagradas River (255 BC), introduced: "I bring you: an arrogant Roman general; a proud state refusing peace terms with the enemy at the gates; imported talent showing the locals how to fight; elephant charges; a Roman army going down to defeat with a higher proportion killed than at Cannae."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:30, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for your share to Margaret Macpherson Grant, "about a little-known 19th-century Scottish heiress and philanthropist, who inherited a vast fortune from her slave-owning planter uncle, and lived out her life with a female partner in the small town of Aberlour. I was drawn to the story of her life when researching an article about a church she founded - the source of her wealth, her lifestyle (which was very unconventional for the time), and the tragic circumstances surrounding her death at a young age were all very compelling subjects to research, and I think that many of our readers would be similarly interested." - just yes, thanks for interesting us! Flowers on my talk. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I gather that the Carthaginians weren't big on playing golf on the Moon, but if you have a bit of spare time, could you look at the above FAC? It's languishing a bit. Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:47, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ibera you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ibera for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Teamwork Barnstar |
It's been most enjoyable working with you to get the Battle of Dunbar into its current shape. Looking forward to the next project... GirthSummit (blether) 15:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC) |
Speaking of "the next project", shall I insert those chunks of your text I stole from Dunbar and have here - English invasion of Scotland 1650–1651? Then you can see what your sources have to replace the 1911 EB's summary of the Worcester campaign. I was thinking that it could do with a map of the UK, showing the various main battles and other places. What do you think? Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Since you're collecting Wikicup points, would you consider having a squiz at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Discovery of nuclear fission/archive1? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of Cape Ecnomus article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 10, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 10, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for the article, about a battle "from the First Punic War. 2,275 years ago was fought the largest naval battle in history, by number of combatants involved. It didn't much effect the war, or even decide the campaign it was a part of."! ... and for the steady flow of GAs and helpfulness just below, in short time that is! See my talk for some apples indicating thanks giving. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
There's a long, confusing story involving the title of Landis' Missouri Battery. When I originally created it, it was at Landis's Battery and it passed GAN under that title. Later, it was pointed out that it was out of line with the MILHIST MOS for unit names, so it became Landis's Missouri Battery (I think it went through DYK under that title). I then remembered a grade school teacher making a big deal that when you make a noun ending in the letter s possessive, you only use the apostrophe and no trailing s, so I renamed it to Landis' Missouri Battery. It passes ACR and is at FAC under that title. I have noticed that the construction "...s'" is much less common on WP than "...s's" (in fact, I see the former about nowhere). However, moving the article title back would screw things up major, given the ACR and FAC link it's created. However, I'm not sure that it ought to pass FAC with the wrong title. Are you aware of any specific MOS guidance on this? Full disclosure: I also remember using this construction on Harris' Missouri Battery (1864) and the dab page Harris' Missouri Battery, so this isn't a one-time mistake of mine. Hog Farm Bacon 18:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
On 10 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hasdrubal, son of Hanno, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that of the four set-piece land battles during the 23 years of the First Punic War, Hasdrubal took part in three as a general? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hasdrubal, son of Hanno. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Hasdrubal, son of Hanno), 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.
—valereee ( talk) 00:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
On 10 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Leptis Parva, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the Battle of Leptis Parva, the losers were spared—except for their commander, who was tortured to death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Leptis Parva. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Leptis Parva), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
All scheduled now for October, here are the links for your blurbs when you're ready. SMS Dresden and Anderson. Obviously no rush Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:10, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope all is well. You seem to be experienced in TFAs, so I came here (sorry if I'm a bother). The thought came into my head that Fabian Ware might be a good TFA for November 11, given that most of his life was dedicated to preserving and ensuring the memory of the war and those who died in it. Can I request that date? Is something already there? Anyways, if you have a moment, could you let me know what how the process works, if it's a bad thought, if I'm making some major error. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 00:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog. Is it possible that you wait until the end of next month before moving articles on the 2PW to FAC? There is an important source upcoming on the subject. It will deal with the battles of Trasimene and Cannae in Livy. I don't know the contents yet, but it will very likely discuss the use of Polybius and other sources by Livy for the descriptions of the battles. T8612 (talk) 01:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Help. Pacifist me knows diddly about military stuff. Is there a "proper way" to deal with civilian internees as opposed to prisoners of war? See discussion here. I would appreciate any help you can give. SusunW ( talk) 20:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Trebia 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
05:45, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Third Punic War you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Third Punic War for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
05:48, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
It's looking like the MILHIST Coord election's gonna be very competitive, especially at the bottom and top points. Good to see there's plenty of people interested. Hog Farm Bacon 15:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Punic Wars 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
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
23:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
On 16 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Ticinus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that cavalry of both sides at the Battle of Ticinus fought on foot? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Ticinus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Ticinus), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Trebia you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Trebia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
12:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
G'day Gog, I am going to be away from the multi-screen desktop on 29 September and therefore will struggle to close the coord election and hand out the stars, change the @Milhist template, update the coord page etc. Would you be able to do those jobs? Let me know? Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Given how close the Cup will be once First Punic War gets promoted, I think it best that I sit on Mathos until after the contest closes.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I think you’re out camping now. Just so you know I’m out hiking this weekend and will be largely off-wiki and unable to respond to the ga review as a consequence. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog. How was camping? No poison Ivy I hope. Someone got an Award today thanks to you. Thanks for all you do! ― Buster7 ☎ 15:58, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
20:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020. Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: An uncorrected typo (even copy editors make copy editing mistakes!) led to an eight-day "leap blitz" from 14 to 21 June, focusing on requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Over 750,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event, keeping pace with the previous three self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated! Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I am a little lost for words at the moment. Thank you so sincerely Sir for your delightful surprise! Kindest regards, JennyOz ( talk) 02:16, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Roman withdrawal from Africa, 255 BC. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC) |
On 25 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Third Punic War, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Third Punic War between Rome and Carthage ended in the complete destruction of Carthage and the death or enslavement of all of its citizens? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Third Punic War. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Third Punic War), 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi, here is a link for Walbank's Commentary on Polybius (see books 36-38 in vol. III for the Third Punic War) and Cambridge Ancient History vol. 8. In case you need them. T8612 (talk) 14:50, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for my cool medal! Amitchell125 ( talk) 14:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Punic Wars you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Punic Wars for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
21:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) 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:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
12:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
15:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
With all due respect, I hope you would consider the comment from T8612 on Primary sources in Talk:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War)/GA1. Hanberke ( talk) 15:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Coordinator stars | |
On behalf of the members of WikiProject Military history, in recognition of your election to the position of Coordinator, I take great pleasure in presenting you with the Coordinator's stars, and wish you the best of luck for the coming year! Cheers Hog Farm Bacon 17:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC) |
![]() | October GAN Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the October 2020 GAN Backlog Drive starts on October 1, and will continue until the end of the month. |
-- Eddie891 Talk Work 16:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Mathos you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Mathos for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:02, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey mate, since we have a new government I've decided to try to nominate our new PM. I've expanded and added citations everywhere were needed. Took me a lot of work since I went to bed at 2 am until, I believe it was ready to nominate. It may need some expansions but I will work on those in the evening. My question is would you have a look to correct my English grammer? Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 06:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For placing second in the WikiProject Military history monthly article writing contest for September 2020, with 67 points from eight articles, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar on behalf of the project. Good work! Harrias (he/him) • talk 20:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 34 reviews between July and September 2020. Harrias ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 05:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Lake Trasimene 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
16:40, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Spendius (Mercenary War) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
19:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Spendius (Mercenary War) 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:Spendius (Mercenary War) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
04:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for reaching out with the Featured Article Medal. It was much appreciated after all the tears and blood. Kind regards, Venicescapes ( talk) 06:15, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Spendius (Mercenary War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Spendius (Mercenary War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Minor Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk ( talk) 02:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hey Gog it is me Kirbopher2004 thanks for the message you left on my talk page I was wondering if you could potentially adopt me with the adopt a user program so that I could be a student under you for the pop culture category. Write back to me soon Kirbopher2004 ( talk) 08:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
I feel weak with school based articles but stronger with Canadian voice actors and the shows that had some sort of involvement from Canada And their voice actors Kirbopher2004 ( talk) 21:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Second Punic War 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Second Punic War 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:Second Punic War for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
00:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Second Punic War you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Second Punic War for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Lake Trasimene you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Lake Trasimene for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
19:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Punic Stater |
For all the articles on Carthage! T8612 (talk) 01:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC) |
T8612 Why, that is very generous. And coming from you, it means a lot. Many thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Military Barnstar | |
For your work on the Battle of Lake Trasimene article. Thank you for helping to improve the coverage of Ancient Rome, Modussiccandi ( talk) 21:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC) |
Modussiccandi, how delightfully unexpected. Sometimes one feels that one is labouring in a vacuum, so the reminder that I am not is much appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Another editor has nominated Minnesota for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
On 16 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Punic Wars, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first of the Punic Wars began in 264 BC, and the third and last ended 118 years later? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Punic Wars. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Punic Wars), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
The article cites "Coward 2003" but no such source is listed in bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]]
to
your common.js page. Thanks,
Renata (
talk)
04:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, your view wrt [4]
User User:SmartyPants22 keep reverting my edit[s] to Future of the British Army stating that 11th Signal Brigade and Headquarters West Midlands has moved to 3rd (United Kingdom) Division from 6th (United Kingdom) Division despite my references: https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/formations-divisions-brigades/3rd-united-kingdom-division/hq-11th-signal-and-west-midlands-brigade/ and the verified tweet https://twitter.com/3rdUKDivision/status/1317029994649014273 . He only preserves the changes to the British Army as of July/August 2019 on that page. Clearly 11th Signal Brigade has moved. He has reverted my stating the reassignment of 11th Signal without any statement, only 'title is better how it was previously'. Why? It is 19 October 2020 not July/August 2019. As per the verified account tweet and the Army website, 11th Signal has clearly reassigned. Why can this not be reflected on a page named Future of the British Army? Why the reverts?
Do you support that user or me?
BlueD954 ( talk) 07:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Don't ask me why I went Yoda voice for the subject Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 15:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
On 26 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Spendius, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the army of Spendius was surrounded, his men ate their horses, their prisoners, and then their slaves before forcing him to negotiate? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Spendius), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Utica 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
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
00:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Are you okay if I pick up this GAN to review? I wouldn't have access to most of the sourcing for spot checks, as my university's library is mostly concerned with religious and medical materials, and the local public branch libraries are mostly full of cowboy porn, Left Behind, and Neoconfederate materials, so I'd have no real way of getting ahold of Hoyos, for istance. Would you be fine with me picking up the review, or would you rather wait for someone who could do spotchecks? (Assuming nobody else claims it before I get off work tomorrow morning). Hog Farm Bacon 03:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Uploaded the image after your notes. Can make further improvements in a more laid-back fashion going forwards, if you like. Harrias (he/him) • talk 07:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Saw 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Saw 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:Battle of the Saw for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Saw you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Saw for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
18:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Utica you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Utica for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
22:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page More.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:20, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope all is well. I've opened a peer review for " O Captain! My Captain!". It would greatly benefit from any comments you may have to offer as I try to figure out how to write an article that isn't on a military biography. I'd really appreciate anything. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 18:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) 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:Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
22:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog, thanks for assessing one of my new articles, but I'm unsure what exact level you gave it with this edit. You marked all of the b-class criteria as yes, but than gave it an overall of C. Normally I wouldn't care, but this is my first attempt to write a book article, so I'm a bit interested in seeing how it stacks up with the standards. Once I can get figured out the various expectations for book articles, I'll probably write a few more. A part of me is aware that probably no-one is going to find these ACW book articles useful, which does give me pause about writing them, since I'm aware that the the vast majority of my output is going to nonuseful subjects (of my 50 GAs, only Batted ball, Alex Gordon, and Battle of Wilson's Creek are anything that someone would ever read). Even though, because I'm stubborn, I'll probably still write more articles about notable books, but I'd like to know if I'm doing it right. Hog Farm Bacon 23:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Are you satisfied with your final scores in the WikiCup? I ask in relation to the good/featured topic Punic Wars. Now I am not very familiar with topics and how they work, so perhaps you can advise me whether the good topic became a featured topic automatically at the point that the Third Punic War became a featured article? The present scoring position seems incorrect in that the GT (15 points) includes three articles and the FT (30 points) two, but basically it is only one topic. Should the articles all be included in the FT giving it a score of 75 with the GT scrapped? I'm unsure, but I reckon that your final score would still be less than Lee's. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:38, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm on quarantine again for a week (exposure to positive test), so I'm gonna have loads of extra time. Anything you'd like me to try to review? Hog Farm Bacon 16:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the October 2020 Military History Article Writing Contest with 88 points from 8 articles. Congratulations, Hog Farm Bacon 19:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC) |
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is
Lee Vilenski (
submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by
Gog the Mild (
submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points.
The Rambling Man (
submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with
Epicgenius (
submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.
The other finalists were
Hog Farm (
submissions),
HaEr48 (
submissions),
Harrias (
submissions) and
Bloom6132 (
submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!
All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.
Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
As I said, I've been working on a project. Still developing it, but I have struggled a bit with the layout and timing overlaps. I think I finally have it structured okay, and I also think that I have decided that it makes more sense to discuss state progress topically rather than try to do a chronological synopsis mixing up the various states. When you have time, this one will take quite a while to finish, I think, can you put an eyeball or two on it? I am going to be glued to results for the rest of the night, I am positive. Wish us luck. SusunW ( talk) 23:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm back again. I've weeded out redundant refs and reformatted the survivors from the first half of WWII, but the rest has two "citation needed"s and a paid-for site, which I can't access. Are you able to help with that at all? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC).
Congratulations on both these awards! Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 20:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
If you don't mind, it's here. Hog Farm Bacon 23:45, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of the Saw at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
21:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
On 11 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Utica, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 100 war elephants led the Carthaginian assault on a rebel camp at the Battle of Utica? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Utica. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Utica), 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:06, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, sort of well done! I really hope this doesn't impact on your major inputs to articles on Wikipedia. But good luck. The Rambling Man ( Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
On 13 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the Siege of Tunis, the Carthaginian general Hannibal was crucified on the same cross to which he had previously nailed a rebel leader? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War)), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
... thank you, for WikiCup, help with Biblical criticism, a great essay! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
The nominator of this FAC - Jenhawk777 - is becoming stressed regarding the progress of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Biblical criticism/archive2. Not unusual for first time nominators and not helped by it being the article's second visit to FAC. It seems to me to be a more significant than average article and that it would benefit from some candid but friendly comments on its MoS adherence and prose flow. So if any of @ CPA-5, Harrias, Mike Christie, and Ergo Sum: fancy having a look, even at a section of it, or know someone who might, it would be well received.
Also pinging @ Katolophyromai, Johnbod, and Display name 99: who supported promotion on the articles first visit to FAC. Cheers to all. Gog the Mild ( talk) 23:45, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
Just saw your note on Jenhawk77's talk; that's an excellent essay. I would like to link others to it occasionally; how about moving it to a more stable-seeming non-"Sandbox" title?
As for the thoughts in the essay, it occurs to me that Jen and the biblical criticism article are examples of something one sees occasionally: editors with a strong primary focus, but who are not really SPAs in any negative sense -- they just want to get one thing done, and they work incredibly hard on that one thing. Editors like that are, in my experience, much more prone to getting stressed out and giving up, perhaps because they place more emphasis on the success or failure of a single article. I've started the review and it's clear she's got a great understanding of the material, but I think a comb-through by editors who are not familiar with the topic is going to be helpful. I hope I and the others you've pinged in can help provide that.
Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 15:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
On 19 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of the Saw, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Carthaginian army trapped 40,000 rebels and starved them into cannibalism before attacking and killing every man at the Battle of the Saw? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of the Saw. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of the Saw), 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.
—valereee ( talk) 00:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Invisible Barnstar | |
Thank you for conducting 2 reviews in the October 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 48%. Thanks for all the work you do, Gog! Regards, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:13, 19 November 2020 (UTC) |
I don't know when or if you will get a response from SurenGrid for Walaka. It doesn't appear he has been too active in November. I had pinged him about his review a week ago. Noah Talk 17:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Just a heads up, not sure which script it was, but among the many correct fixes (thank you!) here there is one screwup, a change from kG (kilogauss) to kg (kilogram). I fixed it. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 20:29, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, not to be a nuisance but just so you know you removed three sources (that were cited) when you were removing unused sources – I've restored them some no worries. If you aren't already using it, I would recommend installing User:Svick/HarvErrors.js, it's super useful for pointing out missing references and such. Best - Aza24 ( talk) 05:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Bless you for this! [5] Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:26, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi, following the remark here, do you think there is enough ground to add Pen & Sword books to the list of unreliable sources here? All the books I've seen from them weren't good, but they also publish in a lot of periods. Perhaps you've already talked about that in the MilHist Wikiproject. T8612 (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Howdy hello! I know you are a frequent contributor of MILHIST articles, and was wondering if you could spare some time to look at Gallic Wars, which I have just finished my first round of writing and research on. I have spent the last few weeks entirely re-writing it, as it was previously sourced almost solely to the works of Julius Caesar himself, whom I have discovered is hardly a reliable narrator. I will get it copyedited and plan to take it to FA, but I'm hoping you can point out content/MILHIST issues, as I have not previously taken a MILHIST article to any status (although I have been an avid reader and writer of history prior). Specific suggestions on layout, conventions, and missing research would be a plus. Any help would be appreciated :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 07:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
hi. could you please look at the draft below, and let me know what you think of it, as an entry? thanks! please ping me when you reply. thanks.
-- Sm8900 ( talk) 16:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for your contributions in the 2020 Wikicup. If we forget the tragedy and chaos of the Second Punic War then again we could have a mutually assured destruction event with elephants or even worse. I appreciate you keeping the memory alive. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC) |
Bluerasberry: thank you, I shall sip with relish. You may, like me, find the Mercenary War, when an admittedly makeshift society fractured and rapidly descended into horrors grotesque even by the brutal standards of the time and nearly achieved an actual MAD, even more of a warning. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello:
Quick question? Can we (GOCE) mark your copy edit of Peroz I "done"? It appears this is the case, but I did not want to presume this is the case. Thanks! Twofingered Typist ( talk)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Inverkeithing 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
03:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of Pontvallain, in collaboration, introduced: "In 1365 after 28 years of strife England won the Hundred Years' War and France signed a humiliating peace. In 1369 France reopened hostilities, using Fabian tactics and guerilla warfare. The English responded with the tactics of the first phase of the war, and in 1370 cut a wide swathe of fire and plunder across northern France. The French refused to be drawn. With winter coming on the English fell out and divided their forces. After a forced march Bertrand du Guesclin surprised a major part of the English, and wiped it out. With unusual coordination, a subordinate caught another English force the same day, also wiping it out. The English remnants were hounded remorselessly and the English position in France was wrecked." -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Inverkeithing you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Inverkeithing for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
07:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey:
Hello! Your submission of
Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Inverkeithing at the
Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in
step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{
db-g7}}, or ask a
DYK admin. Thank you.
DYKHousekeepingBot (
talk)
12:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
For helping to save Battle of Blenheim during featured article review - Dumelow ( talk) 09:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC) |
Dumelow, that is most generous of you, especially as you did most of the heavy lifting for this. Thank you. Gog the Mild ( talk) 12:00, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
I happened to be looking at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/December 2020 and saw only one FAC there; is it possible you forgot to add Honan Chapel and John Early? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:06, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Gog, thank you for shepherding FAs to completion and all the other work you do. It is always a pleasure to see your byline on a page. :) Neopeius ( talk) 18:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hey, Neopeius, you are embarrassing me. But thank you for the barnstar, which you probably know I am a sucker for, and more so for the kind words. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
|
The Cleanup Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling over 12,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 03:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) |
![]() |
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Longest Article, 5th Place | |
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copyediting one of the five longest articles – 4,896 words – during the GOCE November 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 03:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) |
Guild of Copy Editors December 2020 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the December GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since September 2020. Current and upcoming events
Election time: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before Auld Lang Syne. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. December Blitz: This will run from 13 to 19 December, and will target all Requests. Sign up now. Drive and Blitz reports
September Drive: 67 fewer articles had copy-edit templates by this month's close. Of the 27 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and 124 articles were claimed for the drive. October Blitz: this ran from 18 to 24 October, and focused on articles tagged for copy-edit in July and August 2020, and all Requests. Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors copy-edited at least one article. 21 articles were claimed for the blitz. November Drive: Of the 18 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and together claimed 134 articles. At the close of the drive, 67 fewer articles were in the backlog and we had dealt with 39 requests. Other news
Progress report: As of 09:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 663 requests (18 from 2019) since 1 January and there were 52 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 494 (see monthly progress graph above). Annual Report for 2020: this roundup of the year's activity at the Guild is planned for publication in late January or early February. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Seasonal tidings and cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello! I believe we've had a few small interactions in the past and I saw your name when I was looking through the list of FAC Mentors. I know you do mostly MilHist work, but I was wondering if you'd be interested in helping/mentoring me with the goal of getting Ted Kaczynski to FA. I have no experience with FA, and I only have one GA under my belt. I believe all of the images on the page are freely licensed, with most falling into PD. The section on Industrial Society and Its Future is a bit bloated in my opinion and could use splitting, but I'm not sure there are many sources that cover the essay itself and don't point their focus more towards Kaczynski. I'd be willing to create that article (if it is determined that it's notable) and do all the other more monotonous tasks if you'd like - just looking for general guidance and making sure I don't make many "rookie mistakes." Thanks! AviationFreak 💬 11:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Gog; I really do appreciate how diligently you are checking back with reviewers, so I initially thought I would go ahead and lodge my Oppose at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Warner Bros. Movie World/archive1 because I still see issues everywhere I look. But no, not gonna do it ... because the several hours it would take me to go through that article would be unfair to the many, many worthy and well-prepared nominations on the page that I haven't had time to review, even though the nominators took the time to assure their articles were ready. The Warner Bros. FAC (along with several others currently on the page) is now over six weeks old, yet on the same day it was nominated, I stated it was not FAC ready. So, I should have Blatantly Opposed rather than be polite; clearly my fault, and I should know that as well as anyone.
While I understand that some reviewers feel OK about spending their time trying to pull prose up to standard via FAC (or supporting an article on prose only, without consideration of faulty sourcing), and I admire those reviewers and the nominator who persevere, I believe that approach results in a faulty allocation of resources and ends up discouraging reviewers from engaging (as it has me, and I wonder what effect it had on Spicy, who has turned very quickly into quite a solid reviewer). When you have to spend disproportionate time on the least prepared, one can wonder ... to what end? I have chosen instead to put my money where my mouth is, and promise to meet nominators at WP:Peer review, which I have worked to (hopefully) re-invigorate, because peer review is a better way to prepare an article for FAC, without the pressure of time constraints, resulting in a less frustrating experience for both nominators and reviewers.
Attempting to pull the prose (or worse, sourcing) up to standard while an article is at FAC often means that the significant matters that we should be looking at to merely fine tune a prepared article before it gets the star may be overlooked. As they appear to have been at Warner Bros, because I still find sub-standard prose, MOS issues, and more significantly, problems verifying content. It is just not fair to other nominators to allocate limited time to ill-prepared nominations, that would get the star faster if they were shut down sooner, and sent to Peer review where we can work without time pressure and the need to engage the cycle of re-visit, strike, review again, rinse lather and repeat. I don't mind doing that at PR-- that's what PR is for, and editors who take that route are being more respectful of everyone's reviewing time and limits, as we don't have to work under time pressure or the need to revisit at PR.
As I have time, I'll dig in again at FAC, but reminded again to lodge opposes rather than polite suggestions that the article isn't ready and should be withdrawn. This has turned into a much more serious problem at Biblical criticism, where the sourcing and source-to-text integrity problems are of more importance than for a theme park. Working on prose when multiple reviewers have invested days of time uncovering sourcing problems, and then see a FAC launched while they are in the middle of re-reviewing faulty sources, is demoralizing. And that's what is wrong with an approach that allows ill-prepared noms to stay on the page while people try to polish the prose, rather than address underlying issues that come from a hurried presentation at FAC. The instructions say (for good reasons) that articles are archived if at least one nominator feels they are ill-prepared; engaging FAC when that is not the practice is demoralizing, in particular because I end up feeling that I am taking my limited time on and rewarding (a faulty behavior) in those who haven't taken the time they should at the expense of those who have, because then I don't have time to properly review the prepared articles.
Sorry to disappoint :( I am putting this here rather than at WT:FAC, because we've had this discussion so many times already, and it goes nowhere, reviewers are discouraged and disengage, and because I did ping you to say I would review. Bst regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
The evening prior, 1 June, a special edition episode of Hey Hey It's Saturday ("Hey Hey It's Movie World") shot on-location had host Daryl Somers interview many of the celebrities in attendance, such as Eastwood and Russell.[h][21][26] The park opened to the public on 3 June.[21][27] Between 400 and 500 new jobs were created upon its opening."The evening prior" sentence is ... ugh. And were the jobs "created upon its opening"? I doubt it ... they most likely had to hire the people before they opened. I find things like that everywhere, but because the sources gave me nothing but a white screen, I couldn't even decipher how to begin prose repair, without resorting to a lot of template: request quote. The persistence and patience of this editor is an example of why I feel more obliged to give my limited time to an editor who works problematic articles through PR, rather than expecting them to be pulled up via FAC, where reviewers have to return again and again to strike, respond, etc. Separately (not related to this particular FAC), I wish we could get away from the legacy a certain group of editors left upon FAC, by chasing off any reviewer they disliked or who took their prose to task, assuring that most reviewers wouldn't go near their work, and used FAC as a lengthy prose nitpick on their route to pushing each others sub-par prose up the line to TFA ... but hey, that strategy worked for them, so why wouldn't others try it? Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
I am writing every commenter on the FAC that someone is complaining about the length of the FAC so I am asking everyone if they have any comments that can be moved to the Talk page instead. I would deeply appreciate anything you can do to help with this issue. Thank you. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
You said there was not consensus to support, but all the reviews on the actual review page were support. Two of the reviewers were almost done but hadn't completed their reviews yet. They had slowed down, but it's the holidays, and I was cutting them some slack and not complaining. If you had said something, either to them or me, I would have said something to them as well. I know Axl wanted to finish, and I feel confident those last two reviews would have supported, but we'll never know because they never got asked if they wanted to finish or not.
You said BC may have come to FAC too soon, and since Sandy was the only editor who ever made that comment, I assume you were responding to her off page comments. Her criticism of the article may have been fair when the article first came to FAC, but by the end, all the issues were dealt with, so by the time you closed it, they were no longer applicable. Sandy said there was OR in the article. That was one place where I used emphasis on one word. Sandy said that was editorializing, which was the same as OR. That definition is not in the MOS on emphasis - or anywhere else that I can find - but I took it out anyway, so that became a moot point. She said I had misused sources because I had included references for scholars who don't have wiki pages yet. She said those pages qualified as self-published, so I removed them all, so that too was a moot point by the time you closed the FAC. She said there was inconsistency in the referencing style referring to the fact that when one author was referenced multiple times, rp was used, and it wasn't used if an author was only referenced once. According to the Teahouse, where I got that, and the MOS, that's the way rp is supposed to be used. She doesn't like rp, and wants all the rp's replaced, but there was no consensus for that. She wanted to split the article, and strongly disliked its length. I gave multiple reasons why I thought splitting was a bad idea, but I said I would go with the consensus. There was no consensus for splitting it.
By the time the FAC was closed, all her issues had been addressed one way or the other. That may have been a valid discussion for you at FAC to have about the condition BC came in, but by the end of its nine weeks, they were not valid reasons to close it.
I am taking a break for awhile and am probably done with BC and FAC. I invested too much in it, months and months of my life. I will probably be back in the new year, but I won't be working on this article anymore. I need to let it go. It's sad for me, but it's also sad for WP I think, because this article deserves to be listed among its best, and if it had been given one or two more weeks for the last reviewers to finish and offer the support I think they would have, I think it would have been. I'm sorry it didn't get that chance.
I hope you and yours have a wonderful holiday season. I wish you all the best. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I have now posted your essay on my page with its link. Thank you for that! I loved it. I had a harasser instead of a mentor. He ran me of for two years. I'm afraid that happens at least as often as your experience. But at least I'm back - for now anyway - and have found some exceptional people through FAC. I will endeavor to persevere and do the next thing. Thanx again.
Jenhawk777 (
talk)
21:58, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Is there a reason, why you add new entries with "Nov" ( 1 & [6], when it's already December? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 19:19, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
On 11 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Women's poll tax repeal movement, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after U.S. women secured the right to vote in 1920, those from the South fought against paying a poll tax for the next 40 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Women's poll tax repeal movement. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Women's poll tax repeal movement), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
I am having an outside social distancing bonfire progressive dinner party tonight (a whole new post-COVID world), but should be able to review, maybe even two or three, tomorrow ... please give me a hint on several FACs where review is most needed, as I am now behind on the entire page, and would rather start back in where you are most lacking ... I usually end up stuck with the hurricanes :) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
On 13 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Inverkeithing, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the Battle of Inverkeithing, Oliver Cromwell deliberately left open a route for the Scottish army to invade England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Inverkeithing. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Inverkeithing), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Could you please close the FAC for Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael? People have brought up this shouldn't exist even if the main article is significantly expanded on. Guess I will see you guys again in maybe 2 weeks then. Noah Talk 12:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
22:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Mercenary War article has been scheduled as today's featured article for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 15, 2021 following the scuttling of the USS Illiniois Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:28, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I came across your name at Wikipedia:Good article help/mentor. The GA review of King Ludwig Oak has been abandoned by the new editor Cobalt03 who decided to review yesterday due to some problems as stated on my talk page. See the communication at User_talk:Amkgp#Your_GA_nomination_of_King_Ludwig_Oak. As of now it looks as if someone is actively reviewing which is absolutely not. Please help. Thank you — Amkgp 💬 17:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello hardworking editor! Can you help us to rescuing sources of two articles Censorship in Iran and Internet censorship in Iran? I try to do that but the IABot says you haven't permission. Could you do it please. Thanks for your editing articles with complete information.-- Arash00011 ( talk) 13:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Half Barnstar |
Many thanks for helping me get Battle of Powick Bridge over the line and reach Featured status. Your frequent help and support is always appreciated, by me and others. Harrias (he/him) • talk 09:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks Harrias: I butcher your FAC and you give me a barnstar. That seems wrong somehow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Heraklion 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
21:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Heraklion you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Heraklion for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
19:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
You are much better than me at figuring out how to search stuff on here, especially if it has to do with titles and such. Do we have an article that explains the interrelations of the various monarchies of Europe and how that perpetuated foreigners ruling in various countries? SusunW ( talk) 18:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Trade and the prevalence of "foreign rule" spread these customary practices for marriage and inheritance throughout Europeis what we're focused on and the Brill piece's 1st 2 paragraphs explain fairly beautifully how countries were passed from empire to empire (because some French dude became the monarch in England and then that person was replaced by some Dutch dude, who married some Spanish royalty, whose kids hooked up with a German, and then married a Russian). LOL SusunW ( talk) 20:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Rethymno 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations! With 6,230 views, your Battle of Inverkeithing hook is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of December. Accordingly, it has been included at DYKSTATS December. It had a really intriguing twist that made one want to click to find out, "Why would Cromwell have done that?" Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 22:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
You are witnessing the diligence of Ajpolino at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buruli ulcer/archive1; he never does anything haphazardly, and every word is carefully considered, which is only a small part of why I co-nommed at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino. It may take him some time to get through the issues raised, but the wait will be worth it :) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I've made a map of Roman Africa in 146 BC, if you want to add it to the articles on the PW. T8612 (talk) 15:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the Tyrian purple barnstar, for your successful Punic Wars franchise (a bit obscure reference, but " Phoenicia" supposedly relates to Greek for purple)! FunkMonk ( talk) 18:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC) |
Thank you FunkMonk, I feel approproatly porphyrogénnētos Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I've always appreciated your and other editors abilities to work on high-level topics like whole wars and campaigns and the really major battles. My limitations keeping me on brief cavalry skirmishes and obscure artillery batteries makes me almost feel like I'm not pulling my weight.
Hog Farm
Bacon
23:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Gog, would you be interested in writing the articles related to the Third Macedonian War (171-167 BC), with the battles of Callinicus and Pydna? The current articles are just paraphrases of Livy, but I have in pdf a very good and recent source: Paul Burton Rome and the Third Macedonian War (2017). There were four battles at most during the war so it may be easier to promote it to a featured topic that the Second Punic War. Unfortunately, the main sources for the the first two Macedonian Wars are the very expensive History of Macedonia by NGL Hammond and the Commentaries on Livy by John Briscoe. Both are also useful for the 3rd MW, but aren't as detailed (Hammond) or consistent (Briscoe) as Burton's book. T8612 (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Best Wishes,
Lee Vilenski (
talk •
contribs) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Have a great time over the holidays. Keep up the good work in all that you do. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 18:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. It's been a wild year, and I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your contributions and for the role you play in making Wikipedia as good as it can be. Gog, you really are one of my favorite users here, and I've benefited greatly from your advisement on countless articles. I have great respect for the sheer amount and quality of work you do. It was a pleasure interacting with you this year. I wish you and your loved ones all the best this December and in the years to come. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC) PS: Do you remember the Battle of Calais? One of our first interactions, If memory serves-- the bit about it being around Christmas has always stood out to me-- it's a christmas battle, like Die Hard is a Christmas movie.
Donner60 (
talk) is wishing a foaming mug of
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.
No images, fancy backgrounds or fancy code in those curly bracket things. Just a boring old plain text note wishing you a very peaceful Christmas season, and a Better New Year. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Natalis soli invicto! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks Ealdgyth, and a very merry Yuletide to you too. Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
@ Buidhe, Nikkimaria, Ian Rose, and Ealdgyth:, SandyGeorgia has flagged up an issue at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/American logistics in the Northern France campaign/archive1 which I think could do with some further discussion away from that FAC, and possibly, initially, away from FAC altogether - at least initially. (Obviously, if itis agreed that there is an issue worth community discussion it needs to be posted there.) Sandy, re the ACR issue, can you hold fire on that? Once we have got somewhere with this discussion, we can discuss it in detail on the MilHist talk page. I will wish to do this anyway, but would prefer one thing at a time.
Sandy has developed qualms about various aspects of the sourcing of an experienced nominator. Far from the first time this has happened, eg see my very own Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Third Punic War/archive1. Specifically, as I understand it, questions are being raised as to:
Comments are welcome. Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
The issue with hesitation to do source reviewers can be addressed by encouraging splitting it up. E.g. one person addresses the print sources, another person does source checks, a third looks at web sources. That way, people who maybe don't have the time or confidence to complete the entire thing can still contribute. This might also encourage more thoroughness rather than superficial checking it off. ( t · c) buidhe 18:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I feel like everything above is missing the issue which brought this to concern, which is missing or unrepresented sources leading to an imbalance and POV. No amount of checking sources that are used will turn those up. You have to go out and look for them. C.J. Dick's POV was that "Eisenhower was wrong"; scores of other sources have other opinions. I notice Buidhe makes reviews to that effect, at least at FAR. In the three POV FACs I have encountered, it was the lack of viewpoints that created the POV problem. I think a lot of this comes down to reviewers being hesitant these days to do anything more than a cursory look at prose nitpicking because of some past treatment of reviewers who did more. I am also concerned that once a nominator hits a certain number of FAs, their nominations are no longer closely scrutinized; we assume they know their stuff, and don't dig. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, do you think I can reorganise the list of History FAs here? It is difficult to look for something in that wall of blue. I'm thinking of four sections (Ancient, Medieval, Early Modern, Modern). Strangely, Paleocene is in History, while it should go in Geology. T8612 (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Would I be able to re-nominate in less than two weeks? Say, in one week? LittleJerry ( talk) 23:50, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history " Military Historian of the Year" and " Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team
![]() |
2020 Military Historian of the Year | |
As voted by your peers within the Military history WikiProject, I hereby award you the Silver Wiki for coming in second place in the 2020 Military Historian of the Year Award. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions throughout the year. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC) |
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar - always good for morale! Perhaps you can give me some advice since my former mentor Buckshot06 seems to have gone off the grid? Firstly, on three occasions recently I have been preparing to add some material on artillery regiments, only to find that the pages on the parent units have been deleted. These were: 1st Dumbartonshire Rifle Volunteers, 3rd (Ulster) Searchlight Regiment, Royal Artillery, and 6th Cyclist Battalion, Suffolk Regiment. From what I can discover, these were deleted because of serious copyright offences by the author, not because of quality. I have sufficient material to provide new articles on these units, but what is the protocol: should I go ahead, or wait a certain length of time in case the original articles might be reinstated on appeal?
Conversely, I have found that someone has posted an article on 102nd (Ulster) Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery (incorrect title) when there was an existing article on 102nd Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery (correct title, and linked into other articles and categories). How do I flag this up for possible merger?
I'm happy to go on quietly filling gaps in wiki's coverage, but these are murky waters! Regards Rickfive ( talk)
![]() |
The Guidance Barnstar | |
You know that there are many things I would not even attempt without your mentoring and guidance. I truly appreciate the effort you put in and the humor you bring to stressful situations, which lighten the load considerably. I will never be able to adequately express my gratitude, just know that I am beholden to you. SusunW ( talk) 19:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC) |
So I guess you thought it prudent to overlook my comment here, which was probably a kindness on your part, so thank you. I was pretty crushed at the time. Do you still want to work with me on your article, or have you changed your mind? I still feel the same way about working with you, I would be honored, but I understand if you'd rather not. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 06:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I think I must have offended you more deeply than I have understood. I am genuinely sorry for that as it was not my intention. I know that you do not deserve that. Please forgive my bull-in-the-china-shop ways. I am often socially inept and clueless. Feel free to yell at me all I deserve. I'm sure I would benefit from being yelled at by you. I am truly sorry.
Jenhawk777 (
talk)
21:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC) has extended an
olive branch of peace.
Oops. It is I who owe you an apology. I saw the red bell and clicked through to your message. Decided that it would need more than an off the cuff response so I would just finish what I was doing. Then one thing led to another and I forgot. I have got myself over-committed on Wikipedia and non-routine things keep slipping through the cracks. Sorry.
Re the article. Yes, I would still like to work with with you on it, if you would still like to work with me after my carelessness. I have done little work on it since we last spoke, and that mostly on the religious side. I do have some sources lined up for "my" side of things though. It is now bedtime, my time, and I have RL commitments for much of tomorrow. I shall try to make a start on it tomorrow evening, and either way I shall let you know how I am doing. If I don't, a firm smack round the head with that olive branch should gain my attention. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 33 reviews between October and December 2020. Peacemaker67 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 06:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Congrats for the upcoming Mercenary war FA main page appearance and thank you for all your work. ~ Elias Z. ( talkallam) 11:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC) |
Wow! Someone cares. Thank you Elias Ziade, much appreciated.
[shameless plug] If you feel like helping to improve an article, then
Battle of the Saw is
currently at FAC.
[/shameless plug].
Gog the Mild (
talk)
11:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Belated Holiday Greetings to you and yours. You are next in line for an Eddy (next week) but I was hoping you would relinquish your place in the Q for those from last year. A couple of new ones were added today which eased my mind. New noms are always welcome. Thanks for all you do!!! ― Buster7 ☎ 18:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I noticed that the disambiguation article I created yesterday is linked to your task page. Which siege were you referring to as a potential article? Regards Newm30 ( talk) 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
This has had two source reviews - if you're still looking for something in that regard, would you be able to specify what that is? Nikkimaria ( talk) 01:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm probably going to close the review and nominate the article for FA, do you want time to add any more comments? Amitchell125 ( talk) 22:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | |
In recognition of the 128 incredibly incisive and helpful Milhist GAN, ACR, PR and FA reviews you did in 2020, I hereby award you the Premium Reviewer Barnstar. Bloody good effort! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 01:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Gog! Can you pls check the minor tweaks I just did on Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) - if they are OK I'll do same for tomorrow's TFA? JennyOz ( talk) 13:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for the article Mercenary War, introduced: "The First Punic War ended after 23 years with a Carthaginian defeat. Still a great power, Carthage arranged to pay off its army and ship its members home. One botched attempt to shortchange the troops later and the army was blockading Carthage and its African vassals had risen in revolt to join the mutineers with 70,000 volunteers. The war was fought with unusual savagery, even for the time." - That's what we see on Wikipedia's 20 birthday ;) - I have a director to offer for DYK (next set), had a conductor 5 years ago, and the complete works by Bach 10 years ago, all less bloody. Today's intention: not to end the day without a FAC nom. I'm procrastinating, but Jerome Kohl, the effort of many, was worth it, - more help welcome. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
this edit you made on the Exersice tiger page. [1]
Your reference wasn't clear as to what it was, article, book etc but I found it here. [2]
It mentions Operation Tiger 11 pages after the page you reference but says "The incident passed without repercussions." The document does not connect Tiger to that one sentence on page 259 saying he had an increased interest in Normany in any fashion. It makes no judgment at all on the reason. The document does not connect the to things at all. This is the problem with people using sources that are hard to check, like you saying what you wrote was on that page. Actually what you wrote was a total fabrication on your part and i want to know why you did it. If I missed something point it out. Jackhammer111 ( talk) 00:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC).
References
While what I wrote to you before and I'm writing to you now is sternly worded I don't consider it a personal attack. If you're objecting to the word fabrication and I stand by the word because you reach the conclusion that you put on that page that was not supported by your reference. I'm sure you know Wikipedia policy on original research. A lot of men died needlessly in this rehearsal. We shouldn't be saying that this caused more needless deaths on D-Day unless that's really what happened. I'd appreciate it if you were the one that removes this instead of me so it doesn't look like I've taken the second step towards an edit War. We can continue to discuss it if you like. By the way oh, this was a pain in the ass for me to research. I found a copy of the ebook that I downloaded from my library but my eReader doesn't show page numbers.. Slow and bulky. I kind of blew my day. I'm just bitching, I'm not blaming you. Jackhammer111 ( talk) 23:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Rethymno you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Rethymno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
19:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey Gog, I'm helping out with WP:URFA/2020, and there are some very old FAs (promoted around 2006) that use Xenophon/Thucydides/etc. rather uncritically and directly as sources for historical events, rather than modern secondary sources. I have a suspiscion that heavy direct usage of the ancient writers may not be a good thing for FAs, but I thought you and @ T8612: might have more experience with this area and subject, so I'd like to know y'all's opinions. Hog Farm Bacon 19:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I contacted you a little over a month ago about getting Ted Kaczynski to FA. I've gone through your suggestions and had a Copyedit done by the GOCE, and I think the article may be ready for FAC. Twofingered Typist's edit was wonderful, and they ironed out quite a few issues in the article. Let me know what you think as far as how to proceed. Thanks! AviationFreak 💬 17:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
On 19 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Guines (1352), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1352 Siege of Guines reignited the Hundred Years' War after six years of uneasy truce? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Guines (1352). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Siege of Guines (1352)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, are you still copy-editing Jupiter for the GOCE? The request at REQ has been marked as working since 6 January. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I originally brought this up to Ian Rose ( here at their talk page) after being advised to consult one of the project coordinators. An editor from the jazz project appears to have hijacked my nomination of this article with relentless, disparaging, uncivil comments with the intention of removing references to the genre (to which reliable sources are attributed). Their comments section has become bloated, intractable, and unapproachable, and I am worried it's a blight on the nomination and might alienate serious reviewers from taking on the article. I've cited issues with their comments at Ian Rose's talk page, and this latest comment shows the editor will not back down. So I am now here. isento ( talk) 02:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I even tried to distinguish the entirely genre/jazz-focused section by titling it "Genre comments by...", and the editor reverted me with the edit summary "these comments transcend genre" ( [7]). The editor is indulging, escalating, and imploding with each comment. It is disturbing. I can't recall ever encountering such a singular resistance and personalized determination to force one's agenda or ideology at an FAC. Maybe in general. isento ( talk) 03:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
He referred to one reliably sourced statement as "a bullshit statement in a bullshit article" ( [8]) isento ( talk) 04:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I've perused a few of the FA-reviewing guidelines, including this one, which says comments must be actionable, otherwise they won't be considered in determining a nomination's promotion. Their comments are not even approachable. I hesitated to respond again to that editor, because they can't seem to control their aggression and attitude. I feel some kind of intervention is necessary at this point. isento ( talk) 03:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
An antagonistic soliloquy. That is the best way of describing what they've turned the section into. isento ( talk) 05:58, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
"Was "Cyrenaica Command" the formal and official title?"
I just wanted to follow-up about this point. Yes, it was the formal and official title. Am I missing something in the article about that, or need to tweak something?
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
You have certainly had your hand in what I would consider an insane amount of FAs and GAs. As that meme goes, "Just take my [barnstar]!"
Hoping to add to your 2021 bling
|
TheSandDoctor Thank you, much appreciated. For still being in January my 2021 Bling Bar is accumulating nicely. I try to keep my total of GAs and FAs ticking over. Not that I'm obsessed. Oh no. I can give it up any time I want to. Any time. Yes. Any time at all. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ian Ross Campbell (cropped).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
On 3 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Treaty of Guînes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the English and French agreed to a draft treaty in 1354 to end what was to become the Hundred Years' War, but the French reneged and the war continued for a further 101 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Treaty of Guînes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Treaty of Guînes), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
On 5 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Kinghorn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after losing the Battle of Kinghorn in 1332, the Earl of Fife was "full of shame" at being defeated by such a small force? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Kinghorn. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Kinghorn), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Oak Leaves for Battle of the Saw, Spendius, and Battle of Heraklion. Peacemaker67 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC) |
Gog, this is just a curious question - in the GA articles that you rewrote, how did you get all the non-JSTOR sources? Were you reading a lot about them (eg. the Punic Wars) at the time, or is there a simpler way of just accessing relevant sources for a particular need? Thanks in advance. HalfdanRagnarsson ( talk) 10:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
(Specifically, I mean the book sources.) HalfdanRagnarsson ( talk) 10:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
You're mentioned, incase you didn't know and are interested in such things. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 19:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for your Bach reminder! I hope to get to the hymn and the discography, don't know about reception yet, really, - just today was another day of following an obituary, a very unusual one. Bach music pictured -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
The very unusual biography is now on the Main page. The hymn and the discography are expanded. I am still unhappy about having to move the discography to a separate article because one user claims that the original source for the article, from the Bach Cantata Website, is not reliable, while my evaluation seems to be shared by reliable sources, see here:
I found that by chance when looking for recordings. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Update: the tags are gone, and Aza and Wehwalt began rewiewing. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for Siege of Lilybaeum, introduced "For those not yet surfeited on First Punic War articles, I offer this relatively short article on Rome's nine-year-long attempt to end the war by capturing one of Carthage's last two strongholds on Sicily"! A great offer! I am sorry to report that my offer is at a hold because FS is busy elsewhere, and I (and Aza24) don't know what to do. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Today, we have a DYK about Wilhelm Knabe, who stood up for future with the striking school children when he was in his 90s, - a model, - see here. - Further down on the page, there are conversations about the current arb case request - I feel I have to stay away - in a nutshell: "... will not improve kindness, nor any article". - Yesterday, I made sure on a hike that the flowers are actually blooming ;) - The FAC situation looks much better. I wonder why we had a peer review ... - sorry that the FAC turned into one. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Your DYK hook about the Battle of Kinghorn received 6,372 page views (531 per hour) while on the Main Page. It is the one of most viewed hooks during the month of February and has thus earned a place on the February stats list. Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 17:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear Gog the Mild. Thank you for having made yourself available for FA mentoring! I am a novice with just over 6000 edits and one very recent GA: Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty. I now wonder about FA. The article is on the waiting list for copy-editing by GOCE. Perhaps I should also put it on the list for Peer Review, but I am a bit hesitant to ask so many people for help and time. Could you please have a quick look and tell me what you think. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Modest Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg ( talk) 18:56, 15 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
14:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | March 2021 Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the March 2021 GAN Backlog Drive starts on March 1, and will continue until the end of the month. |
( t · c) buidhe 04:28, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear Gog the Mild. We are one step further. Twofingered Typist has been professional and thorough: quite a few changes. I learned a couple of things. I have tried my hand at A-Class Review: Uganda–Tanzania War by user Indy beetle. Buidhe and Eddie891 have also reviewed, but this review seems to have gone asleep. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Dupplin Moor 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
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
10:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Dupplin Moor 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:Battle of Dupplin Moor for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
12:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Dupplin Moor you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Dupplin Moor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
18:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Are you familiar with this author? War against Nabis is an old featured article I checked for WP:URFA/2020, and I listed it as needing a featured article review if work is not done at WP:FARGIVEN. The fact that whole sections are sourced solely to Livy and the rather dated Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology are enough to warrant the FAR notice, but I'm trying to determine the full extent of the issues. Holleaux is an older source, but it's possible they could still be fine. Are you familiar with how useful that author is? Hog Farm Talk 03:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
On 3 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1356 Henry of Lancaster marched an English expedition through Normandy 330 miles (530 km) in 22 days while successfully avoiding battle with the French king's far larger army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Help, help, help! Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Editor of the Week | |
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your fellowship with others. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Military History Project |
Gog the Mild |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning March 07, 2021 |
The scale and quality of Gog's contributions in many topics and interests are impeccable. Plus, he appreciates fellow editors with words (and awards) of encouragement. His lists of promoted articles and draft main page blurbs (and, especially, its archive}, are impressive. He finished in second place in the 2020 Military Historian of the Year Award. 32 Featured Articles and 81 Good Articles. Known for his tactful, honest and knowledgeable advice. |
Recognized for |
contributing to WP:DYK, Featured article candidates, and Military History |
Notable work |
helping a group of university students learn how to use Wikipedia |
Submit a nomination |
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 15:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the February 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 47 points from 6 articles. Congratulations, Eddie891 Talk Work 17:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC) |
I am slowly advancing through the Americas, but now I have arrived at the US and oh my. Our articles are terrifically conflated. I really, really did not want to have to rewrite existing articles, merely to add information to them, but I am bamfoozled on this one. Nationality is who belongs. Citizenship is what you get for belonging. But both the United States nationality law and Citizenship of the United States cover a whole lot of the same information because of an apparent misunderstanding of the terms. I don't want to rewrite two articles, so I want to know how to determine who are the most prolific contributors to the citizenship article. If I know that, perhaps I can get them to assist with that one so that the who and the what are clear to readers. Do you know how to do that? SusunW ( talk) 17:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Just archive it now so less time will be wasted waiting to renominate. isento ( talk) 16:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Will they? Is that reviewer going to be there again? isento ( talk) 17:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Some of those sources are pretty crucial. And they didn't elaborate on why they questioned their quality. What exactly am I supposed to do with that? isento ( talk) 17:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I could of course replace some of the references to AllMusic, even though one reviewer demonstrated at the review how it actually is a good source. But I doubt that would be enough to dispel the air of concern the original source reviewer cast on the nom a long time ago. isento ( talk) 17:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I believe I have justified the questioned sources' reliability and quality. At the original reviewer's section, the next source reviewer's section, with another reviewer echoing one particular source's reliability. Yes, please reread. Thank you. And if the nominator need not do more than they have done, they should not say they will. And for the record, that is not my experience with source reviewers. Others have offered more detail and thought in their responses. isento ( talk) 17:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
If you say so isento ( talk) 15:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of the Saw article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 21, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This really shouldn't have been promoted... there were still unaddressed sourcing concerns, including a major one with the frequent use of a self-published book. What's the point of source reviews if they're ignored when the find unresolved issues? Aza24 ( talk) 00:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Gog, I am reluctant to bring this up now considering you are already dealing with the (fill in the adjective) posts a few sections above this one about source reviews, and I don't want to add to that unnecessary burden. But because those posts and this issue relate to what I have been trying to further (more help on source reviews along with a more active peer review), I am confused and dejected more so than concerned. I feel like I no longer understand what FAC is. Here's where recent FAC decisions confuse me:
It looks like we now have a default in favor of lengthy FACs, even when they did all the hard work off-FAC, and appear at FAC prepared. At the same time that other nominators are seeing their articles promoted as soon as they have the bare minimum of support, even with outstanding issues on the page. This is confusing and discouraging, at least to me, as I am working as hard as I can (three weeks off notwithstanding per computer repair) to promote a more active Peer review and to encourage source reviewers. It seems that with these examples we are not only going sideways on the very things I am working to improve, but also seeing a default that favors lengthy FACs even when they prepared off-FAC. Can you see why I am confused, and discouraged, by this? I know you to be conscientious and diligent in all of your work, and very much appreciate that, so I hope you can give me some feedback such that I won't feel my peer review and source review work has been futile. Why is Heart of Thomas stalled, when the other two went through as soon as they had the bare minimum, even with outstanding concerns? Am I working in the wrong directions? Are our views about how FAC should function so different that I should think about working elsewhere ? Best regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I have a feeling that the spot check on the Tibesti Mountains FAC might be a little intimidating given that about a quarter of the sources are in French. I've heard that requesting reviews is frowned upon, and so I was wondering whether you think it would be appropriate to ping a French-language reviewer, such as Nikkimaria, to ask whether they might have time to squeeze in a spot check. I wouldn't expect to get a support out of a spot check, so perhaps a request of this sort would be more ethical. Thanks for all your work at FAC. Brycehughes ( talk) 06:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Your DYK hook about Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 drew 5,308 page views (442 per hour) while on the Main Page. It is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of March as shown at Wikipedia:Did you know/Statistics#March 2021. Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 21:23, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, how are you? I saw your comments in the Blond Ambition Tour FA nomination page; I agree it's not ready; I wish to withdraw the nomination, can you tell me how? Thank you!! -- Christian ( talk) 20:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for labouring with Bach's cantata composed for today, - perhaps listen. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary with the beginning of Passover today - putting some little ego-battles in perspective -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 15:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Why did you archive “Cups”? I thought you were giving 2 days? The Ultimate Boss ( talk) 10:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Crap. I didn’t mean it. That’s why I reverted it. Ceoil was being awesome and helping me out. The Ultimate Boss ( talk) 10:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I just signed my name in blood on the nom page that will work with Ultimate Boss before the next, hopefully successful nom. I am optimistic, there is easily enough rel source material for a FA, and my long promised ce is in process. I may cut back on some of the stats, esp in the lead, but this is doable. Boss...lets keep in contact before any more promotions, pls....and sorry for being silent these last few months, I can imagine that was frustrating. Ceoil ( talk) 17:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
...and trying my hardest to write in British English. It's a nightmare. Just saying, when the foremost expert on British Nationality writes the "Naturalization Act" allowed persons to "naturalise" how the heck am I, a mere Southernese-English speaker supposed to know how the heck to translate stuff from normal English to British English? I have decided just to write them the best I can and leave it to someone else to figure it out and pretty up. o.O 24 done and only like 170 to go ... progress of a sort. Hope all is well with you. SusunW ( talk) 21:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have noted your recent terrific work and efforts in editing. would you be interested in serving in the role of "coordinator" at WP:HIST? please let me know. Please ping me when you reply. thanks! -- Sm8900 ( talk)
![]() | |
Three years! |
---|
Musing about the TFA on my talk, please help watching. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
On the main page today: an article about music significant in my life, Bach's motet Jesu, mein Freude, one of the strangest histories from the start in 2006 to the Main page today! Perhaps it will make it to FA some day ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of the Saw, introduced with thanks: "Ancient Carthaginians again. Hannibal's father making his name during a nasty episode in a nasty war."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
@ Serial Number 54129: OK, so I totally missed this until just now. You didn't make it big enough. Thank you, I am impressed. Now I need to work out how to get it out of my monitor so that I can eat it. Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Gog, on this one I slipped while trying to type edit summary "don't make the lead about the term". On this one of yours, are you now OK going back to lowercase siege? Dicklyon ( talk) 16:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, sorry to bother you. Just a quick question about the sources you use. Do you borrow them from a library, buy them for a specific article, or already have them in your possession? I'd like to know so that I can decide what's best when expanding articles using book sources in the future. Kind regards, Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 19:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
In Battle of Rethymno , "The German 2/I Battalion dug in on the hilltop having suffered 400 dead or wounded."
Are those casualties cause from attacking "Hill A" or Defending "Hill A" From Australian counter-attack ?
Thank you.-- Comrade John ( talk) 12:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
02:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
As you might have noticed, most of my battle-related content work is for article subjects with not a whole lot that has been written about them, but I've finally been working on one this year that actually has quite a bit of coverage - the Battle of Raymond. It's part of the Vicksburg campaign, which is one of the most-written events in the whole ACW. While there aren't any stand-alone scholarly works about Raymond (there's a self-published book by a guy with no real credentials and a short one by a hyperlocal battlefield friends group that this basically self-published), just about any book about the Vicksburg campaign will have at least several pages about Raymond. And there's just no real way to be able to access every single work about Vicksburg. I've gotten a pretty good span of the literature through stuff I have, books I borrowed from family members, university libraries, Google books, Wikipedia Library, etc. But I'm not sure where the line of "I can't corporate everything, but I've incorporated enough" is. What's your general advice on how to tell what extent of a vast literature is enough for A-Class? Hog Farm Talk 04:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm willing to chip in a couple a week. My internet has been running very poorly lately, so I haven't been able to monitor the FAC page much, but I'd like to still keep reviewing FACs regularly. If as coord, you see a FAC that needs some reviews, ping me over there and I'll try to get a review in. I can generally probably do a couple a week, although pop culture stuff is not an area I prefer to review in. Hog Farm Talk 21:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog the Mild, thank you for your encouraging closing comments on the Mynors FAC. Since the nomination's closure, I've worked successfully with the reviewers at PR to address the issues they raised. I'd like to take up your offer of a new FAC for the article without the two-week hiatus. Of course, I will not go ahead with a new nomination without your approval. On the topic of additional reviewers: in addition to those who reviewed last time around, I've been assured by Ergo Sum that they will chip in. I'm also expecting a review from SandyGeorgia who didn't want to comment until after a subject specialist had had a look - this has now been done by Llywrch. My FAC mentor Gerda suggested that Eddie891 would be a good reviwer (I would contact them once the FAC has been filed). Best, Modussiccandi ( talk) 15:43, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
GtM, I see you are scheduling May. It looks like the Menstrual cycle FAR is wrapping up (it was delayed by some sock activity). I am still hoping that dementia with Lewy bodies will run on July 21, so with the goal to spread out our limited medical content (every two months), it would be good to either get Menstrual cycle in May, or delay it til September. Might you leave an open May slot just in case it gets through FAR soon? Otherwise, we'll go for September. Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Buffalo Wings | |
From a guy in a suburb in Buffalo, New York and a wing fanatic, here's some wings for ya for the FA review award. Analyzing other people's work really gives you an idea of what is wrong or to watch out for when you write your own article. It's such a valuable experience! 👨x🐱 ( talk) 01:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC) |
Thanks HA, I shall enjoy. I agree, I wish that all wannabe FAC nominators would do half a dozen FAC reviews, 3 or 4 PRs and a couple of ACRs before their first nomination. It would probably make for a much less bruising experience. But c'est la vie. Gog the Mild ( talk) 09:12, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello. The article 2020–21 SC East Bengal season was recently promoted to FA. Now, I want to go for FA. Will you be my mentor? Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 15:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
16:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Just nipping in and taking care of this one, the floor is yours again... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The article
Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
14:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
|
Thanks so much for your comments on the FAC for Armenian Genocide denial. You really pushed me to improve the article! ( t · c) buidhe 21:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
Hi buidhe and thank you. Especially for the reassurance. I was a little twitchy that I was just being nit picky a couple of times. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:10, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know I've tweaked one sentence in the blurb which didn't imo make sense. Regards, Amitchell125 ( talk) 18:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm thinking of put the work into helping keep History of timekeeping devices as a FA, as it's a really interesting article imo. Question—when references have both ISBN and OCLC numbers, are both supposed to be there with FA s? (e.g. ISBN 0-7432-1676-8. OCLC 53324804) Amitchell125 ( talk) 14:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
It looks like the nominations listed at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests that need source checks is a place that needs helping out. Are my source reviews of high-enough quality from what you've seen to be useable? Sourcing is the backbone of FA quality, and I'm nervous I'll be the one to break the entire FAC process by performing source reviews that don't cut it. Hog Farm Talk 17:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For your consistently high-quality work. I don't know how you do it all! Eddie891 Talk Work 22:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
Easy! I have stopped sleeping. Thank you, much appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't know where to post this but regarding Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests, I believe Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/One of the Boys (1989 TV series)/archive1 has already undergone an image review by SNUGGUMS, unless I'm missing something. Heartfox ( talk) 22:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Can we find a way for beaver to be off limits for April 7, 2022. I don't want people to keep nominating it and having to inform them that I already requested a certain day. LittleJerry ( talk) 18:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Treaty of Guînes 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
14:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, an editor seems to be hacking around with the lead section of Thomas Erpingham, which happens to be on the main page today. The editor has made 20 edits made in 3 hours, all minor, and has not discussed anything yet on the article's talk page—and I'm not convinced of the quality of the changes that have been made. This person seems to have begun contributing in January 2021, so lacks experience. Do know how I should best approach putting the lead back to how it was without getting into a war? Regards, Amitchell125 ( talk) 21:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Editors of TFAs almost never watchlist the article and after 18 TFAs I have rarely had anyone come back to me on this, and then very politely. Also, I rarely read edits to "my" TFAs while they are on the main page, it is bad for my blood pressure. Does this help? Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:39, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Tidy up, changes and reverts to good faith edits around the recent TFA appearance per [[WP:FAOWN]]. If you think that an improvement to the article has been reverted, feel free to discuss it on the talk page.
![]() |
Thank you today for Battle of Rethymno, about a "very hard fought World War II battle which was part of the 1941 Battle of Crete. So hard fought that both sides lost."! - Perhaps you can help with a translation related to the conditions for peace coming growing whatever - on my talk, look for Wenn Menschen sich vergessen. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. - Shoot for the stars in the same set, - a good match. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey Gog, will most likely finish up the source review on my FAC later today. Would you still like a couple more reviews in the meantime? I have an open opportunity for advertising at WT:VG, but I don't want to get people to waste time and energy if it's unecessary. Panini! 🥪 15:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Help copy edit. Thank you. Vnosm ( talk) 12:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
I've spent 1/2 an hour trying to figure out how to do that conversion thingy and just cannot wrap my head around it. 25,000,000 Spanish pesetas in 1899 is the equivalent of what US $ now. All these converters keep asking me Euros, which confuses me because Euros didn't exist in 1899, but pesetas quit existing in 2002. I'm probably making this way harder than it needs to be, but it is beyond me to comprehend. You can try to explain it to me, but it would be easier if you could just put it in here: "In 1899, Germany purchased the Carolines for 25 million Spanish pesetas, equivalent to $?". I appreciate you. If you are too busy, no worries. SusunW ( talk) 18:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
The article
Treaty of Guînes you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Treaty of Guînes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
00:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Just asking because my idea of this seems a bit different from yours. For example, the Santería article is well prepared but hasn't got much substantive feedback. If it doesn't attract such in the near future, it's likely to be archived. So it does urgently need feedback, doesn't it? The Jamiroquai article I only put on the list because it was previously archived for lack of comment, but seemed well-prepared also. ( t · c) buidhe 17:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate, long time no see. I've recently edited the Battle of Rethymno one of those edits was a unit conversation and one of them was a rewrite of a unit that was fully written per MOS:UNITNAMES. What's wrong with those edits or was it one of your FA clean-ups again? Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 14:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Weardale campaign 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
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
09:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Treaty of Lutatius, introduced: Regular reviewers of my articles from the First Punic War may well be pleased to hear that we have finally reached the end of the war. This article covers the peace treaty that ended the 27-year-long conflict. - I am sooo pleased to see something on a treaty, instead of another battle. First June flower. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
adding some impressions of places, flowers and music -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Do you think I could nominated Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon a little earlier than its two week period at FA? I am going to be working full time at a new job and will have to start getting ready to leave college soon. Meaning I will have to leave Wikipedia in July. You know I'm shooting for the stars, aiming for the moon 💫 ( talk) 08:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Since York County, Maine, Tercentenary half dollar seems ready for promotion, would you mind if I went ahead with my next one, John McGraw?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
The article
Weardale campaign you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Weardale campaign for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
10:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 11 reviews between January and March 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
23:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the May 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 30 points from 4 articles. Congratulations, Zawed ( talk) 09:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC) Talk 03:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC) |
... Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 7, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
... and Battle of Caen (1346) at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 26, 2021, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Roman military belt buckles - just a thought... Girth Summit (blether) 21:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi! As I'm sure you'll remember, you were invaluable in helping me get Mary van Kleeck over the finish line to FA status - thank you again, by the way. I'm now considering nominating Mary Jane Richardson Jones for FA status. I created the article on New Year's and Edwininlondon did a great GA review with me in May ( Talk:Mary Jane Richardson Jones/GA1).
Would you mind taking a quick look over the article and advising me of any major barriers/areas to work on before I nominate it? Edwin mentioned the reference organization in the GA review, and this is definitely something I want to improve on, so any advice in that area particularly would be great. Thank you! Ganesha811 ( talk) 03:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gog!
Thank you for archiving my misfiled FAC. Is someone else going to move it or should I renominate but in FLC?
-- Neopeius ( talk) 13:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
What ho! If you have half an hour to spare perhaps you'd be kind enough to look in at the peer review for Arnold Bennett, which I'm considering taking to FAC if I return to that bandit country, now that, judging from my recent incursions, it is less bandit-infested than it was a little while ago. Tim riley talk 11:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog! I hope you are well. I was a little sad to see the Davis article was archived, but I completely understand that there wasn't a consensus for promotion. I will work on the article and make sure it does on the next occasion, however. :) In the close, you mentioned that neither nominator would be able to nominate any articles for two weeks. I do understand that those are the rules, but my other FAC closed a minute earlier; so I'd like to request the possibility of opening a slot for a single nomination of an FAC (not the same article). I am happy to wait out the 2 weeks for this single nomination, if that's deemed to be beneficial to the project.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors June 2021 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, our first newsletter of 2021, which is a brief update of Guild activities since December 2020. To unsubscribe, follow the link at the bottom of this box. Current events
Election time: Voting in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 16 June and will conclude at the end of the month. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Have your say and show support here. June Blitz: Our June copy-editing blitz is underway and will conclude on 26 June. Drive and blitz reports
January Drive: 28 editors completed 324 copy edits totalling 714,902 words. At the end of the drive, the backlog had reached a record low of 52 articles. ( full results) February Blitz: 15 editors completed 48 copy edits totalling 142,788 words. ( full results) March Drive: 29 editors completed 215 copy edits totalling 407,736 words. ( full results) April Blitz: 12 editors completed 23 copy edits totalling 56,574 words. ( full results) May Drive: 29 editors completed 356 copy edits totalling 479,013 words. ( full results) Other news
Progress report: as of 26 June, GOCE participants had completed 343 Requests since 1 January. The backlog has fluctuated but remained in control, with a low of 52 tagged articles at the end of January and a high of 620 articles in mid-June. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu and Twofingered Typist, and from member Reidgreg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:37, 26 June 2021 (UTC).
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
So I've recently decided on an ambitious project. Not sure how the scope would work. If I did Missouri in the American Civil War, would I need to tack on things such as Palmyra massacre and the Sacking of Osceola or the Camp Jackson affair, as well as all the campaigns. Or would it just be best to create List of American Civil War battles in Missouri, which would be hard to scope because there were over 1,000 when you count the skirmishes. Or do you think I could just get away with the lazy route and just do the overall article and the battles? Note: I'm not expecting this to be a quick process. Hog Farm Talk 00:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey there Gog. I'm currently co-nominator for the nomination of Martin Rundkvist. Knock on wood, it's going well—three supports, addressed comments from a recently added fourth review, and now just missing an image review. Would you mind if I got a head start on a second nomination? -- Usernameunique ( talk) 05:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I assume that you are wanting to nominate another collaboration? Any editor is allowed both a sole nominator nom and a collaboration nom without special permission. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive | ![]() |
July 2021 Backlog Drive:
| |
Other ways to participate: | |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.
Click here to opt out of any future messages. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you The Writer's Barnstar for taking second place in the June 2021 MILHIST writing contest, scoring 20 points from two articles. Zawed ( talk) 03:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC) |
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 10 reviews between April and June 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
00:35, 3 July 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
War against Nabis was recently delisted at FAR for poor sourcing, but it is still rated A-Class for MILHIST. I'm considering taking this to ACR again for improvement or delisting, because it is heavily sourced to Livy and Smith's 1873 source that has not aged well, but thought it worthwhile to get a second opinion on this first.
Also, for the continuing URFA/2020 project (I'm afraid the delisting of many older FAs is gonna start irking people soon), Alcibiades is one of the oldest ones on the table, and was noticed for potentially needing FAR back in March due to heavy use of Smith 1873, Thucydides, Xenophon, and Plutarch in places. Due to caps on FAR nominations, I've only been able to make one FAR nomination over the last month, so I want to save mine for the most problematic ones. In your opinion, does the sourcing in Alcibiades warrant FAR? Hog Farm Talk 02:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for First Punic War, introduced "As a finale to my series of articles on the First Punic War, I offer you the article on the War itself. 23 years of war boiled down to less than 6,000 words – so there is a discussion point right there."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the scheduling of August. I wonder why some bios have birth and death days and months that are not relevant to the specific day, but especially about 23 August, where it says 5 August. Could that one perhaps be moved? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations, Gog, on all the detailed work you have devoted to this article and to many of the related articles it links to. From time to time, the FA on the main page really attracts my attention, as this one did today. It's thanks to editors like you that Wikipedia is gaining increasing respect as a reliable and readable source of information. I look forward to further GAs and FAs in relation to ancient history. I'm afraid I can't offer much assistance but I enjoy reading up on these important events.-- Ipigott ( talk) 10:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Treaty of Guînes. — Bilorv ( talk) 20:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC) |
Cheers, Bilorv, thanks for that. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Because I know you are dying to know, I have done 85 of 195. Why does it feel as if I am not making progress? Still swimming in so much to do with very little light at the end of this tunnel. Mayhaps when I hit 1/2 it will feel different. That being said, I am certainly learning a lot. SusunW ( talk) 19:27, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, there's only one thing pending with the source review, and I believe it's been addressed for sometime now. Sturm isn't being super commutative, and the SR seems to have greatly stalled the whole process. I'm wondering if perhaps promotion might be called for at this point...? Sorry if I come off as presumptuous. Aza24 ( talk) 21:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
This week's articles for improvement are:
– Emley Moor transmitting station –
– Bleaklow –
– Spectacles –
:P Girth Summit (blether) 09:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, a few months ago, I began work on promoting my article SS Choctaw to FA. The project eventually stalled, as I have been quite busy in real life. I would like to work on it again, and was wondering if you would be willing to help me with it.
Just so I understand the rules for the future: I am quite impressed with the article, and think it should become Featured once a question I had about the drawings was addressed. Is there anything I could/should have said to make you not close the nomination? — Kusma ( talk) 09:57, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Burnt Candlemas 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Burnt Candlemas 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:Burnt Candlemas for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
00:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Burnt Candlemas you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Burnt Candlemas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
17:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Battle of Caen (1346), another "article on the Hundred Years' War. At least it is not about Gascony. This features the much-vaunted English army of Crécy a little earlier in the campaign. Completely out of control both before and after they stumble to victory in their assault on Caen. A stain on England's record which neither discomfited them nor persuaded the French to battle."! - some recent July images to thank you -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:41, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Halidon Hill 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
Tayi Arajakate --
Tayi Arajakate (
talk)
20:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Halidon Hill you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Halidon Hill for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Tayi Arajakate --
Tayi Arajakate (
talk)
08:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:30, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Have nommed Cullen House at FAC, if you are stuck for something to review. Be gentle... Girth Summit (blether) 14:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Gog, I was collating last month's FAC data and noticed this comment of yours. I know the image/source review requests are reserved for FACs that are getting close to support, but I didn't think the urgents list had that restriction. I'm pretty sure that in the past it's been used for anything that needs more reviews and is starting to age. Has anything changed, or am I misremembering? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 21:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, Gog the Mild! I wanted to quickly thank you for all of your work coordinating the featured article candidates. Hope you enjoyed your vacation! KyleJoan talk 17:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD ( talk) 18:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind having another look at Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope you are well! Quick question: with the current state of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1986–87 Gillingham F.C. season/archive1, am I permitted to nominate another article? All the best, ChrisTheDude ( talk) 17:04, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the July 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 55 points from 6 articles. Congratulations, Hog Farm Talk 18:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC) |
Speedy as ever. Thanks Hog Farm. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:04, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
On 10 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Burnt Candlemas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an English army devastated Lothian in Scotland so thoroughly in 1356 that the episode became known as Burnt Candlemas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Burnt Candlemas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Burnt Candlemas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
All is still still at McGraw. I hope there is no objection to my nominating another article?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 11:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
On 12 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Oroscopa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when surrounded at the Battle of Oroscopa Carthaginian troops killed their horses and burnt their wooden shields to cook them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Oroscopa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Oroscopa), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Gog the Mild, apologies for the random message. I just wanted to say thank you for promoting Lights Up to FA. This would be my very first FA, and I'm happy that this got promoted after one previously unsuccessful FAC. I hope you have a great day. -- Viridian Bovary ( talk) 14:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
He asked me directly, removing my earlier doubts re collaboration. He may be sorry that he did, I hope not. SusunW ( talk) 18:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi! While I've lurked Wikipedia for years I've only been actively editing it for a few months. However, I've often seen your name pop up in contests, talk pages of articles I've read, or in WikiProject pages and thought you'd be a good person to come to for advice. I'm currently working on improving the article on the First Carlist War to reach the quality it truly deserves as one of the most important conflicts in Spanish history. I'm going to be working on it for the next few weeks but I was wondering if you could give me some advice based on my work so far, which you can see in my sandbox and includes the Background and Basque Fueros sections. One particular concern I have is respecting the structure of the original article, which I disagree with (for example, I feel the division between north and south fronts rather than a chronological and more holistic view of the conflict's progress is bad as it makes them appear as two different theaters rather than different areas of operations). How should I deal with that without creating animosity from other people that contributed to the article? I would also greatly appreciate any other comments on the work I have done so far. Warm regards -- A. C. Santacruz ( talk) 20:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the input! I'll definitely take it into account, and see where you're coming from. Thanks for the advice :D A. C. Santacruz ( talk) 22:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Was this edit intentional? It appears to have been done using the "rollback vandalism" option. Stuff like that happens to me accidentally all the time (I've had to essentially disable rollback on mobile editing because of my fat fingers). Hog Farm Talk 01:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 16, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 16, 2021. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 13:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
It's looking like I'm going to have a lengthier review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James Longstreet/archive1. I've quoted a source in a few spots - is it appropriate to quote the source directly on the FAC page, or should I move it to the FAC talk page? Hog Farm Talk 04:47, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, if you have to withdraw Aliens due to lack of activity can I have permission to list Ghostbusters within the 2 week period? It might not be good to go within the 2 weeks, I'm thinking just in case since if Aliens drops out, I could maybe get GB1 and GB2 to FAC before the third film comes out. Thanks. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:20, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1650) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1650) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.
Tayi Arajakate
Talk
17:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I was checking on User:Dying's edits, made another edit, then reverted myself ... the issue seemed clear at first (didn't want to repeat "lead ship ... class ... lead ship ... class" right from the start), but now it's clear as mud so I better back off. The article on the class uses "was" for the class (reasonably enough), but the TFA article uses "is". Some people feel strongly about these things (or used to, maybe not now). One option I think would be to avoid tense altogether by starting off the second sentence "The last lead ship of any class of United States battleships, ...". Thoughts? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Crécy campaign, well timed with a battle of it OTD, and introduced: "An invading English army landed in Normandy in July 1346. During the next seven weeks it burnt and looted its way across France, coming within 2 miles of the walls of Paris. Every time it met French forces it defeated them, including at the battle of Crecy. It halted at Calais, which the English besieged and starved into submission over 11 months."! - Also OTD, pictured: Sigmund Jähn, first German in space, whose article we expanded when died. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:52, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hamilcar's victory with Naravas 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
10:41, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
You went a bit far there with the source removal - some of them were still being used in the text I retained from the previous version. I was going to revert and then selectively remove, but thought you might still be working on it and didn't want to cause an edit conflict. Let me know if I'm free to reinstate. Girth Summit (blether) 19:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Been discussing User:Dying's edits on this one on their talk page ... I think we can reduce the chances of problems at WP:ERRORS if I tweak this one to be closer to the current version of the article lead. Objections? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) 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
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
05:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I was eager to get that FA done, and I appreciate your help getting it wrapped up in time for the anniversary, and helping manage the date request at TFA. If you need another FA review or similar, just ping me on my talk page. Happy to reciprocate. Shooterwalker ( talk) 03:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hamilcar's victory with Naravas you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Hamilcar's victory with Naravas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
16:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Oroscopa 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
19:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants,
The Rambling Man and
Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being
Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are
Gog the Mild,
Lee Vilenski,
BennyOnTheLoose,
Amakuru and
Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles.
Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on
Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Guines (1352) 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
15:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Guines (1352) 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:Siege of Guines (1352) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
20:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Guines (1352) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Siege of Guines (1352) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
13:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@ Amakuru, BennyOnTheLoose, Bloom6132, Epicgenius, Hog Farm, Lee Vilenski, and The Rambling Man: I am aware that several of you have asked FAC coordinator permission to nominate a second article. And have seen that I am editing and wondered why I am ignoring the requests. This is because Cwmhiraeth has asked me to "leave that sort of decision to the other coordinators during the rest of the WikiCup". I am finding this a little frustrating, and imagine that you find it more so, but as a current WikiCup participant myself I am in a difficult position and you are going to have to wait on Ian - which after all only puts you in the same position as me. I have also been asked to avoid promoting any FAcs by the seven of you for the duration. I can see that there may be the appearance of a conflict of interest in both of these areas and so am complying for now. I am afraid that this may mean that FAC is likely to be a little clunky for us eight until the WikiCup finishes. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
For finishing first in the August 2021 WikiProject Military history writer's contest, scoring 43 points from 4 articles. Hog Farm Talk 06:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC) |
Hog Farm Talk 06:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Kinghorn 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
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
13:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
On 5 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article English invasion of Scotland (1650), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Thomas Fairfax, Lord General of the New Model Army, resigned his commission rather than invade Scotland in 1650? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/English invasion of Scotland (1650). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, English invasion of Scotland (1650)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I don't know who to ping. I don't understand how I can do any more to prove that a work painted in 1808 is in the public domain, then to link it to a page saying it is in the public domain. Which is what I did. Serendi pod ous 16:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Appreciate all the help. I don't know the first thing about image curation. I think Nikkimaria assumed I did. Serendi pod ous 18:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Kinghorn 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:Battle of Kinghorn for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
20:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Gog, thanks for all your advice, mentorship, and hand holding over the years. I've greatly enjoyed all of your top-notch work that I've gotten a chance to review and really appreciated your help of me (and other editors). It means a lot and really makes a difference; I finally got an article through FAC without needing your reviewing-- that's a pretty big milestone in my book :) Who knows, I might even try to do it again. Keep up the great work! Eddie891 Talk Work 02:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Eddie, that is very generous of you. And your praise is making me blush. No need for you to be over modest, you class as an old hand at FAC now. When I was closing your latest offering I just thought "Ah, another from Eddie, they know what they're doing. I need to go through the motions, but I'm sure it'll be fine." And it was. I look forward to your fifth nomination, what do you have in mind? Gog the Mild ( talk) 09:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Kinghorn you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Kinghorn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
07:21, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Oroscopa you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Oroscopa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
17:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
So User:Hog Farm/Black Terror (ship) just needs me to flesh out the lead before it would be ready to publish. I was hoping for GA or A-class until I turned up the Smith source, but the one ship/two ships conflict between sources will obviously need to be better addressed for even B-class. I would guess with your work in ancient warfare that you've run into similar unreconcilable conflicts between RS accounts. Can you think of a better way to weave these together? I suspect the Smith source may be right, but the majority run with the other approach. Hog Farm Talk 00:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of Bergerac article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 13, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:41, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
It's been 5 days without a comment. The majority now support. Can we close as promote? Serendi pod ous 00:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
09:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Breteuil 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
20:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Roman withdrawal from Africa (255 BC), introduced (as a battle): "When I nominated Battle of the Aegates I wrote "the third and final installment of my trio of naval battles from the First Punic War". I was wrong. Missing was this, the Carthaginian's worst naval defeat of the 23-year-long war; which was swiftly followed by the Roman's worst disaster of the war - a storm sank most of their fleet, killing over 100,000."! - I have a former machinery hall on the same page, which became a venue for Beethoven's Fidelio. I took pics, but it came without, - two on my talk. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Today: a woman in red, two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Breteuil you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Siege of Breteuil for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
08:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
On 18 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hamilcar's victory with Naravas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an army commanded by Hannibal's father was saved from defeat when part of the enemy force deserted and fought alongside him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hamilcar's victory with Naravas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Hamilcar's victory with Naravas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) 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
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
04:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
20:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) 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:Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
03:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
14:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
15:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
This is just to let you know that the Wikimedia ZA AGM will be taking place on 25 September 2021 See below for more details.
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
13:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I am officially 1/2 way through Africa!!!★★¡¡¡ I think I can get one more in before the month ends and then I am rewarding myself in October to do a woman for Women in Green's October editathon, before I get back to the slog. Have you given thought to my proposal? Bad idea? Good idea? Just meh? SusunW ( talk) 13:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Worcestershire - one of England's oldest and still existing (with some minor boundary changes) ceremonial and political shires, famous for its nearly 1000 year old cathedral, the River Severn, the
AONB of the
Malvern Hills, some of the oldest schools in the country, England's fastest growing university, apples, pears, cider and cricket, and of course its world famous
sauce. The Wikiproject is now in need of some attention. Created 12 years ago, this project amassed a huge resource for editors working on all kinds of articles and categories related in some way or another to the county.
Kudpung is more or less retired from Wikipedia getting on for 2 years ago and it would be good if a group of editors could get it up to date and continue to maintain it.
Opt out of this message list
here.
WikiProject Worcestershire 14:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog,
Double Sharp and I believe Ceres (dwarf planet) should be moved to its formal name, 1 Ceres, parallel to e.g. 50000 Quaoar. However, we don't want to destabilize the article during FAC. On the other hand, I don't want to wait and then have the argument that it must stay at its current name because that's what it passed FAC under. Any advice? Could the title maybe be part of the FAC? — kwami ( talk) 03:35, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Coordinator stars | |
On behalf of the members of WikiProject Military history, in recognition of your election to the position of Coordinator, I take great pleasure in presenting you with the Coordinator's stars, and wish you the best of luck for the coming year! Hog Farm Talk 03:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC) |
Guild of Copy Editors September 2021 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021. Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{ cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive). Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 13 reviews between July and September 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
03:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Truce of Calais 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
04:01, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
The article
Truce of Calais you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Truce of Calais for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
18:21, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gog the Mild. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Battle of Galatas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 11:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you, and all who helped, today for Battle of Bergerac, introduced: "The first nine years of the Hundred Years' War had created an expensive stalemate on all fronts. Then the Earl of Derby arrived in Gascony with a small force. Within three weeks he had smashed the French force assembling at Bergerac and captured the town, marking the start of sixteen months of spectacular success."! - Defeated on AN, but with two Recent death articles on the same page, Mordechai Geldman and Evelyn Richter, and in waiting, Luis de Pablo, - sad but rewarding to remember them. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Today: see yourself, read about a hymn praying to not be on earth in vain, about a comics artist whose characters have character (another collaboration of the "perennial gang", broken by one of us banned), and in memory of the last prima donna assoluta, Edita Gruberová. I had to go to two grave sites last week, one who died now, one who died 10 years ago, so standing upright and in black seems appropriate. More colours - but subdued - can be had on hikes, - updated. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Today: memories in friendship -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I really enjoyed reading this. Nice job! auntieruth (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I assume you haven't scheduled Carillon for TFA as you voted in the nomination and therefore cannot/should not? Thrakkx ( talk) 18:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
On 17 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hundred Years' War (1345–1347), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1345 and 1346 the English repeatedly defeated the French in both north and south-west France? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hundred Years' War (1345–1347). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Hundred Years' War (1345–1347)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |
![]() | 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. |
Hello! Your submission of
Mathos at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
17:49, 25 August 2020 (UTC)
Can you explain me why you reverted this edit made by me. [1] Thank you. Empire AS Talk! 02:56, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
- DePiep ( talk) 00:13, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Cheers.
Gog the Mild ( talk) 14:17, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
I do not wish to ...- the answer is yes. (I missed this question earlier on). Anyway, by directly pointing to a MOS my question might be clear anyway, and the fact that I appear on your talkpage is proof of the "D" you ask for. So why would you do so? If you have an IAR at hand then say so. (And please stop nagging about non-existant differences between "claim" and "edit-summarising" and "straightout stating by editing"). - DePiep ( talk) 10:25, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
You take issue with my assertion that diplomatic considerations and naval engagement occupied the first few years of the Hundred Years' War ("No, it didn't") and ask for a source. It is Hundred_Years'_War#Beginning_of_the_war:_1337–1360. While the phrase inserted is a simplification, of course (it's not easy distilling eight years into fourteen words), leaping directly from the start of the war in 1337 to Edward's sailing in 1345 a sentence later begs the question (in the vernacular sense) of what was happening all that time. Something is needed; if you'd care to try your hand at it, I'd be happy for an improvement in the article. -- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 15:40, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
-- Piledhigheranddeeper ( talk) 18:07, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Piledhigheranddeeper: change made. You may wish to check it over. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:41, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog! If you got some time, there are articles in need of descriptions @ Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/Next issue/Featured content. On a completely unrelated note, I've noticed that the MILHIST folks are looking for new-ish people to run for co-ord this time around. I'd be willing to put myself forward-- do you think I'd be a good candidate/it's worth running? I don't have my heart set on it one way or another. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 22:33, 26 August 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
23:04, 27 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
01:22, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
The article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno 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:Hasdrubal, son of Hanno for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
19:01, 28 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I hope you're keeping well. I recently created Viet Cong and People’s Army of Vietnam terror in the Vietnam War. I shamelessly copied over the Overview section from various Wikipages, I don't think it reads very well, but I'm having a mental block on how to rewrite/reorganise it. Would you mind taking a look at it when you have some time? best regards Mztourist ( talk) 09:53, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
I thought that the hook you preferred for United States war plans (1945–1950) (... that in a 1949 war plan, the United States targeted 70 Soviet cities with 133 nuclear weapons, of which eight would be dropped on Moscow and seven on Leningrad?) was a bit lame, given that a present-day Trident submarine carries 192 x 400 Kt warheads and could easily carry out this program by itself. But I was wrong; the article received 12,717 page views, which is awesome for a non-lead hook. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:42, 30 August 2020 (UTC)
The article
Hasdrubal, son of Hanno you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Hasdrubal, son of Hanno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
02:01, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ticinus 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:40, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Mathos 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
17:02, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Third Punic War 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
21:20, 31 August 2020 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
On 1 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Mathos, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the army he served in mutinied, Mathos became the leader of a 90,000-strong force in a war against ancient Carthage? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Mathos. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Mathos), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:02, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were
Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Vanamonde ( talk), Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 19:52, 1 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ticinus 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:Battle of Ticinus for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:40, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ticinus you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ticinus for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:42, 2 September 2020 (UTC)
On 3 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Dunbar (1650), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that having routed their Scottish opponents at the Battle of Dunbar 370 years ago today, the cavalry of the English New Model Army sang the 117th Psalm? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Dunbar (1650). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Dunbar (1650)), 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.
— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog, has been a while. I started working on an article about body armour in the 18th century, but I probably won't be able to finish it. Would you like to take care of it? Regards, LeGabrie ( talk) 17:14, 3 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Ibera 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
02:00, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of the Bagradas River (255 BC), introduced: "I bring you: an arrogant Roman general; a proud state refusing peace terms with the enemy at the gates; imported talent showing the locals how to fight; elephant charges; a Roman army going down to defeat with a higher proportion killed than at Cannae."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:30, 5 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for your share to Margaret Macpherson Grant, "about a little-known 19th-century Scottish heiress and philanthropist, who inherited a vast fortune from her slave-owning planter uncle, and lived out her life with a female partner in the small town of Aberlour. I was drawn to the story of her life when researching an article about a church she founded - the source of her wealth, her lifestyle (which was very unconventional for the time), and the tragic circumstances surrounding her death at a young age were all very compelling subjects to research, and I think that many of our readers would be similarly interested." - just yes, thanks for interesting us! Flowers on my talk. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:55, 27 September 2020 (UTC)
I gather that the Carthaginians weren't big on playing golf on the Moon, but if you have a bit of spare time, could you look at the above FAC? It's languishing a bit. Many thanks.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:47, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Ibera you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Ibera for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:22, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Teamwork Barnstar |
It's been most enjoyable working with you to get the Battle of Dunbar into its current shape. Looking forward to the next project... GirthSummit (blether) 15:59, 6 September 2020 (UTC) |
Speaking of "the next project", shall I insert those chunks of your text I stole from Dunbar and have here - English invasion of Scotland 1650–1651? Then you can see what your sources have to replace the 1911 EB's summary of the Worcester campaign. I was thinking that it could do with a map of the UK, showing the various main battles and other places. What do you think? Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:09, 6 September 2020 (UTC)
Since you're collecting Wikicup points, would you consider having a squiz at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Discovery of nuclear fission/archive1? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 20:25, 7 September 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of Cape Ecnomus article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 10, 2020. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 10, 2020, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.
For Featured Articles promoted recently, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.
We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors from the day before this appears on Main Page. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:53, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for the article, about a battle "from the First Punic War. 2,275 years ago was fought the largest naval battle in history, by number of combatants involved. It didn't much effect the war, or even decide the campaign it was a part of."! ... and for the steady flow of GAs and helpfulness just below, in short time that is! See my talk for some apples indicating thanks giving. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:31, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
There's a long, confusing story involving the title of Landis' Missouri Battery. When I originally created it, it was at Landis's Battery and it passed GAN under that title. Later, it was pointed out that it was out of line with the MILHIST MOS for unit names, so it became Landis's Missouri Battery (I think it went through DYK under that title). I then remembered a grade school teacher making a big deal that when you make a noun ending in the letter s possessive, you only use the apostrophe and no trailing s, so I renamed it to Landis' Missouri Battery. It passes ACR and is at FAC under that title. I have noticed that the construction "...s'" is much less common on WP than "...s's" (in fact, I see the former about nowhere). However, moving the article title back would screw things up major, given the ACR and FAC link it's created. However, I'm not sure that it ought to pass FAC with the wrong title. Are you aware of any specific MOS guidance on this? Full disclosure: I also remember using this construction on Harris' Missouri Battery (1864) and the dab page Harris' Missouri Battery, so this isn't a one-time mistake of mine. Hog Farm Bacon 18:51, 9 September 2020 (UTC)
On 10 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hasdrubal, son of Hanno, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that of the four set-piece land battles during the 23 years of the First Punic War, Hasdrubal took part in three as a general? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hasdrubal, son of Hanno. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Hasdrubal, son of Hanno), 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.
—valereee ( talk) 00:04, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 40, July – August 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 10:14, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
On 10 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Leptis Parva, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the Battle of Leptis Parva, the losers were spared—except for their commander, who was tortured to death? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Leptis Parva. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Leptis Parva), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:01, 10 September 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:52, 11 September 2020 (UTC)
All scheduled now for October, here are the links for your blurbs when you're ready. SMS Dresden and Anderson. Obviously no rush Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:10, 12 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope all is well. You seem to be experienced in TFAs, so I came here (sorry if I'm a bother). The thought came into my head that Fabian Ware might be a good TFA for November 11, given that most of his life was dedicated to preserving and ensuring the memory of the war and those who died in it. Can I request that date? Is something already there? Anyways, if you have a moment, could you let me know what how the process works, if it's a bad thought, if I'm making some major error. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 00:56, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog. Is it possible that you wait until the end of next month before moving articles on the 2PW to FAC? There is an important source upcoming on the subject. It will deal with the battles of Trasimene and Cannae in Livy. I don't know the contents yet, but it will very likely discuss the use of Polybius and other sources by Livy for the descriptions of the battles. T8612 (talk) 01:32, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
Help. Pacifist me knows diddly about military stuff. Is there a "proper way" to deal with civilian internees as opposed to prisoners of war? See discussion here. I would appreciate any help you can give. SusunW ( talk) 20:35, 13 September 2020 (UTC)
G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Trebia 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
05:45, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Third Punic War you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Third Punic War for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
05:48, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
It's looking like the MILHIST Coord election's gonna be very competitive, especially at the bottom and top points. Good to see there's plenty of people interested. Hog Farm Bacon 15:56, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Punic Wars 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
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
23:20, 15 September 2020 (UTC)
On 16 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Ticinus, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that cavalry of both sides at the Battle of Ticinus fought on foot? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Ticinus. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Ticinus), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 12:01, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Trebia you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Trebia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
12:02, 16 September 2020 (UTC)
G'day Gog, I am going to be away from the multi-screen desktop on 29 September and therefore will struggle to close the coord election and hand out the stars, change the @Milhist template, update the coord page etc. Would you be able to do those jobs? Let me know? Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 08:23, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Given how close the Cup will be once First Punic War gets promoted, I think it best that I sit on Mathos until after the contest closes.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:19, 17 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I think you’re out camping now. Just so you know I’m out hiking this weekend and will be largely off-wiki and unable to respond to the ga review as a consequence. Best, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:15, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog. How was camping? No poison Ivy I hope. Someone got an Award today thanks to you. Thanks for all you do! ― Buster7 ☎ 15:58, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
20:43, 18 September 2020 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors September 2020 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2020. Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Election reminder: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opens for nominations on 1 December. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: An uncorrected typo (even copy editors make copy editing mistakes!) led to an eight-day "leap blitz" from 14 to 21 June, focusing on requests and articles tagged in May. 19 participating editors claimed 54 copy edits. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Over 750,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event, keeping pace with the previous three self-isolated drives. Of the 38 people who signed up, 30 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 16 to 22 August, we copy edited articles tagged in June and July 2020 and requests. 12 participating editors completed 37 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Baffle gab1978, Tdslk, Twofingered Typist, and first-time coordinator Puddleglum2.0. Reidgreg took a break after serving for a couple years. Thanks to everyone who participated! Progress report: As of 01:33, 18 September 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 532 requests since 1 January and there were 38 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:02, 19 September 2020 (UTC)
I am a little lost for words at the moment. Thank you so sincerely Sir for your delightful surprise! Kindest regards, JennyOz ( talk) 02:16, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Roman withdrawal from Africa, 255 BC. ♠ PMC♠ (talk) 03:55, 23 September 2020 (UTC) |
On 25 September 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Third Punic War, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Third Punic War between Rome and Carthage ended in the complete destruction of Carthage and the death or enslavement of all of its citizens? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Third Punic War. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Third Punic War), 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 25 September 2020 (UTC)
Hi, here is a link for Walbank's Commentary on Polybius (see books 36-38 in vol. III for the Third Punic War) and Cambridge Ancient History vol. 8. In case you need them. T8612 (talk) 14:50, 26 September 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for my cool medal! Amitchell125 ( talk) 14:32, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Punic Wars you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Punic Wars for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
21:22, 28 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) 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:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
12:00, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
15:22, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
With all due respect, I hope you would consider the comment from T8612 on Primary sources in Talk:Siege of Carthage (Third Punic War)/GA1. Hanberke ( talk) 15:24, 29 September 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Coordinator stars | |
On behalf of the members of WikiProject Military history, in recognition of your election to the position of Coordinator, I take great pleasure in presenting you with the Coordinator's stars, and wish you the best of luck for the coming year! Cheers Hog Farm Bacon 17:13, 29 September 2020 (UTC) |
![]() | October GAN Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the October 2020 GAN Backlog Drive starts on October 1, and will continue until the end of the month. |
-- Eddie891 Talk Work 16:30, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
The article
Mathos you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Mathos for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:02, 30 September 2020 (UTC)
Hey mate, since we have a new government I've decided to try to nominate our new PM. I've expanded and added citations everywhere were needed. Took me a lot of work since I went to bed at 2 am until, I believe it was ready to nominate. It may need some expansions but I will work on those in the evening. My question is would you have a look to correct my English grammer? Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 06:45, 3 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For placing second in the WikiProject Military history monthly article writing contest for September 2020, with 67 points from eight articles, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar on behalf of the project. Good work! Harrias (he/him) • talk 20:14, 5 October 2020 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 34 reviews between July and September 2020. Harrias ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 05:28, 7 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Lake Trasimene 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
16:40, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Spendius (Mercenary War) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
19:02, 7 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Spendius (Mercenary War) 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:Spendius (Mercenary War) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
04:02, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
Thank you for reaching out with the Featured Article Medal. It was much appreciated after all the tears and blood. Kind regards, Venicescapes ( talk) 06:15, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Spendius (Mercenary War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Spendius (Mercenary War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:22, 8 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Minor Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling between 1 and 3,999 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE September 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Tdslk ( talk) 02:46, 9 October 2020 (UTC) |
Hey Gog it is me Kirbopher2004 thanks for the message you left on my talk page I was wondering if you could potentially adopt me with the adopt a user program so that I could be a student under you for the pop culture category. Write back to me soon Kirbopher2004 ( talk) 08:01, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
I feel weak with school based articles but stronger with Canadian voice actors and the shows that had some sort of involvement from Canada And their voice actors Kirbopher2004 ( talk) 21:01, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Second Punic War 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:40, 10 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Second Punic War 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:Second Punic War for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
00:40, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Second Punic War you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Second Punic War for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:22, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Lake Trasimene you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Lake Trasimene for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
19:02, 11 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Punic Stater |
For all the articles on Carthage! T8612 (talk) 01:12, 12 October 2020 (UTC) |
T8612 Why, that is very generous. And coming from you, it means a lot. Many thanks. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:14, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Military Barnstar | |
For your work on the Battle of Lake Trasimene article. Thank you for helping to improve the coverage of Ancient Rome, Modussiccandi ( talk) 21:05, 12 October 2020 (UTC) |
Modussiccandi, how delightfully unexpected. Sometimes one feels that one is labouring in a vacuum, so the reminder that I am not is much appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:25, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
Another editor has nominated Minnesota for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 21:42, 12 October 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:21, 15 October 2020 (UTC)
On 16 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Punic Wars, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first of the Punic Wars began in 264 BC, and the third and last ended 118 years later? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Punic Wars. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Punic Wars), 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
The article cites "Coward 2003" but no such source is listed in bibliography. Can you please add? Also, suggest installing a script to highlight such errors in the future. All you need to do is copy and paste importScript('User:Svick/HarvErrors.js'); // Backlink: [[User:Svick/HarvErrors.js]]
to
your common.js page. Thanks,
Renata (
talk)
04:10, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi, your view wrt [4]
User User:SmartyPants22 keep reverting my edit[s] to Future of the British Army stating that 11th Signal Brigade and Headquarters West Midlands has moved to 3rd (United Kingdom) Division from 6th (United Kingdom) Division despite my references: https://www.army.mod.uk/who-we-are/formations-divisions-brigades/3rd-united-kingdom-division/hq-11th-signal-and-west-midlands-brigade/ and the verified tweet https://twitter.com/3rdUKDivision/status/1317029994649014273 . He only preserves the changes to the British Army as of July/August 2019 on that page. Clearly 11th Signal Brigade has moved. He has reverted my stating the reassignment of 11th Signal without any statement, only 'title is better how it was previously'. Why? It is 19 October 2020 not July/August 2019. As per the verified account tweet and the Army website, 11th Signal has clearly reassigned. Why can this not be reflected on a page named Future of the British Army? Why the reverts?
Do you support that user or me?
BlueD954 ( talk) 07:53, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
Don't ask me why I went Yoda voice for the subject Best, Barkeep49 ( talk) 15:23, 19 October 2020 (UTC)
On 26 October 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Spendius, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the army of Spendius was surrounded, his men ate their horses, their prisoners, and then their slaves before forcing him to negotiate? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Spendius), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 26 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Utica 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
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
00:01, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Are you okay if I pick up this GAN to review? I wouldn't have access to most of the sourcing for spot checks, as my university's library is mostly concerned with religious and medical materials, and the local public branch libraries are mostly full of cowboy porn, Left Behind, and Neoconfederate materials, so I'd have no real way of getting ahold of Hoyos, for istance. Would you be fine with me picking up the review, or would you rather wait for someone who could do spotchecks? (Assuming nobody else claims it before I get off work tomorrow morning). Hog Farm Bacon 03:30, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:21, 27 October 2020 (UTC)
Uploaded the image after your notes. Can make further improvements in a more laid-back fashion going forwards, if you like. Harrias (he/him) • talk 07:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Saw 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
14:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Saw 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:Battle of the Saw for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
15:00, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Saw you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Saw for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
18:02, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Utica you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Utica for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Eddie891 --
Eddie891 (
talk)
22:21, 28 October 2020 (UTC)
An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page More.
( Opt-out instructions.) -- DPL bot ( talk) 06:20, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope all is well. I've opened a peer review for " O Captain! My Captain!". It would greatly benefit from any comments you may have to offer as I try to figure out how to write an article that isn't on a military biography. I'd really appreciate anything. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 18:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) 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:Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
17:00, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of the Bagradas River (c. 240 BC) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
22:01, 30 October 2020 (UTC)
Hey Gog, thanks for assessing one of my new articles, but I'm unsure what exact level you gave it with this edit. You marked all of the b-class criteria as yes, but than gave it an overall of C. Normally I wouldn't care, but this is my first attempt to write a book article, so I'm a bit interested in seeing how it stacks up with the standards. Once I can get figured out the various expectations for book articles, I'll probably write a few more. A part of me is aware that probably no-one is going to find these ACW book articles useful, which does give me pause about writing them, since I'm aware that the the vast majority of my output is going to nonuseful subjects (of my 50 GAs, only Batted ball, Alex Gordon, and Battle of Wilson's Creek are anything that someone would ever read). Even though, because I'm stubborn, I'll probably still write more articles about notable books, but I'd like to know if I'm doing it right. Hog Farm Bacon 23:25, 31 October 2020 (UTC)
Are you satisfied with your final scores in the WikiCup? I ask in relation to the good/featured topic Punic Wars. Now I am not very familiar with topics and how they work, so perhaps you can advise me whether the good topic became a featured topic automatically at the point that the Third Punic War became a featured article? The present scoring position seems incorrect in that the GT (15 points) includes three articles and the FT (30 points) two, but basically it is only one topic. Should the articles all be included in the FT giving it a score of 75 with the GT scrapped? I'm unsure, but I reckon that your final score would still be less than Lee's. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:38, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
I'm on quarantine again for a week (exposure to positive test), so I'm gonna have loads of extra time. Anything you'd like me to try to review? Hog Farm Bacon 16:43, 2 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the Writer's Barnstar for placing second in the October 2020 Military History Article Writing Contest with 88 points from 8 articles. Congratulations, Hog Farm Bacon 19:54, 2 November 2020 (UTC) |
The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is
Lee Vilenski (
submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by
Gog the Mild (
submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points.
The Rambling Man (
submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with
Epicgenius (
submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.
The other finalists were
Hog Farm (
submissions),
HaEr48 (
submissions),
Harrias (
submissions) and
Bloom6132 (
submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!
All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.
Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
As I said, I've been working on a project. Still developing it, but I have struggled a bit with the layout and timing overlaps. I think I finally have it structured okay, and I also think that I have decided that it makes more sense to discuss state progress topically rather than try to do a chronological synopsis mixing up the various states. When you have time, this one will take quite a while to finish, I think, can you put an eyeball or two on it? I am going to be glued to results for the rest of the night, I am positive. Wish us luck. SusunW ( talk) 23:33, 3 November 2020 (UTC)
Sorry, I'm back again. I've weeded out redundant refs and reformatted the survivors from the first half of WWII, but the rest has two "citation needed"s and a paid-for site, which I can't access. Are you able to help with that at all? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 17:12, 4 November 2020 (UTC).
Congratulations on both these awards! Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 20:27, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
If you don't mind, it's here. Hog Farm Bacon 23:45, 5 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of
Battle of the Saw at the
Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at
your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
Yoninah (
talk)
21:39, 10 November 2020 (UTC)
On 11 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Utica, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that 100 war elephants led the Carthaginian assault on a rebel camp at the Battle of Utica? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Utica. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Utica), 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:06, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:51, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
Well, sort of well done! I really hope this doesn't impact on your major inputs to articles on Wikipedia. But good luck. The Rambling Man ( Hands! Face! Space!!!!) 19:33, 11 November 2020 (UTC)
On 13 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the Siege of Tunis, the Carthaginian general Hannibal was crucified on the same cross to which he had previously nailed a rebel leader? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War)), 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:01, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
... thank you, for WikiCup, help with Biblical criticism, a great essay! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 22:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
The nominator of this FAC - Jenhawk777 - is becoming stressed regarding the progress of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Biblical criticism/archive2. Not unusual for first time nominators and not helped by it being the article's second visit to FAC. It seems to me to be a more significant than average article and that it would benefit from some candid but friendly comments on its MoS adherence and prose flow. So if any of @ CPA-5, Harrias, Mike Christie, and Ergo Sum: fancy having a look, even at a section of it, or know someone who might, it would be well received.
Also pinging @ Katolophyromai, Johnbod, and Display name 99: who supported promotion on the articles first visit to FAC. Cheers to all. Gog the Mild ( talk) 23:45, 15 November 2020 (UTC)
Just saw your note on Jenhawk77's talk; that's an excellent essay. I would like to link others to it occasionally; how about moving it to a more stable-seeming non-"Sandbox" title?
As for the thoughts in the essay, it occurs to me that Jen and the biblical criticism article are examples of something one sees occasionally: editors with a strong primary focus, but who are not really SPAs in any negative sense -- they just want to get one thing done, and they work incredibly hard on that one thing. Editors like that are, in my experience, much more prone to getting stressed out and giving up, perhaps because they place more emphasis on the success or failure of a single article. I've started the review and it's clear she's got a great understanding of the material, but I think a comb-through by editors who are not familiar with the topic is going to be helpful. I hope I and the others you've pinged in can help provide that.
Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 15:02, 16 November 2020 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 41, September – October 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 10:47, 18 November 2020 (UTC)
On 19 November 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of the Saw, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Carthaginian army trapped 40,000 rebels and starved them into cannibalism before attacking and killing every man at the Battle of the Saw? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of the Saw. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of the Saw), 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.
—valereee ( talk) 00:01, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Invisible Barnstar | |
Thank you for conducting 2 reviews in the October 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 48%. Thanks for all the work you do, Gog! Regards, Eddie891 Talk Work 14:13, 19 November 2020 (UTC) |
I don't know when or if you will get a response from SurenGrid for Walaka. It doesn't appear he has been too active in November. I had pinged him about his review a week ago. Noah Talk 17:06, 19 November 2020 (UTC)
Just a heads up, not sure which script it was, but among the many correct fixes (thank you!) here there is one screwup, a change from kG (kilogauss) to kg (kilogram). I fixed it. GA-RT-22 ( talk) 20:29, 21 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, not to be a nuisance but just so you know you removed three sources (that were cited) when you were removing unused sources – I've restored them some no worries. If you aren't already using it, I would recommend installing User:Svick/HarvErrors.js, it's super useful for pointing out missing references and such. Best - Aza24 ( talk) 05:27, 22 November 2020 (UTC)
Bless you for this! [5] Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:26, 25 November 2020 (UTC)
Hi, following the remark here, do you think there is enough ground to add Pen & Sword books to the list of unreliable sources here? All the books I've seen from them weren't good, but they also publish in a lot of periods. Perhaps you've already talked about that in the MilHist Wikiproject. T8612 (talk) 18:14, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
Howdy hello! I know you are a frequent contributor of MILHIST articles, and was wondering if you could spare some time to look at Gallic Wars, which I have just finished my first round of writing and research on. I have spent the last few weeks entirely re-writing it, as it was previously sourced almost solely to the works of Julius Caesar himself, whom I have discovered is hardly a reliable narrator. I will get it copyedited and plan to take it to FA, but I'm hoping you can point out content/MILHIST issues, as I have not previously taken a MILHIST article to any status (although I have been an avid reader and writer of history prior). Specific suggestions on layout, conventions, and missing research would be a plus. Any help would be appreciated :) CaptainEek Edits Ho Cap'n! ⚓ 07:53, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
hi. could you please look at the draft below, and let me know what you think of it, as an entry? thanks! please ping me when you reply. thanks.
-- Sm8900 ( talk) 16:15, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Thanks for your contributions in the 2020 Wikicup. If we forget the tragedy and chaos of the Second Punic War then again we could have a mutually assured destruction event with elephants or even worse. I appreciate you keeping the memory alive. Blue Rasberry (talk) 20:05, 30 November 2020 (UTC) |
Bluerasberry: thank you, I shall sip with relish. You may, like me, find the Mercenary War, when an admittedly makeshift society fractured and rapidly descended into horrors grotesque even by the brutal standards of the time and nearly achieved an actual MAD, even more of a warning. Gog the Mild ( talk) 20:14, 30 November 2020 (UTC)
Hello:
Quick question? Can we (GOCE) mark your copy edit of Peroz I "done"? It appears this is the case, but I did not want to presume this is the case. Thanks! Twofingered Typist ( talk)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Inverkeithing 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
03:40, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of Pontvallain, in collaboration, introduced: "In 1365 after 28 years of strife England won the Hundred Years' War and France signed a humiliating peace. In 1369 France reopened hostilities, using Fabian tactics and guerilla warfare. The English responded with the tactics of the first phase of the war, and in 1370 cut a wide swathe of fire and plunder across northern France. The French refused to be drawn. With winter coming on the English fell out and divided their forces. After a forced march Bertrand du Guesclin surprised a major part of the English, and wiped it out. With unusual coordination, a subordinate caught another English force the same day, also wiping it out. The English remnants were hounded remorselessly and the English position in France was wrecked." -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:58, 4 December 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Inverkeithing you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Inverkeithing for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
07:02, 5 December 2020 (UTC)
Hey:
Hello! Your submission of
Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Inverkeithing at the
Did You Know nominations page is not complete; if you would like to continue, please link the nomination to the nominations page as described in
step 3 of the nomination procedure. If you do not want to continue with the nomination, tag the nomination page with {{
db-g7}}, or ask a
DYK admin. Thank you.
DYKHousekeepingBot (
talk)
12:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Article Rescue Barnstar | |
For helping to save Battle of Blenheim during featured article review - Dumelow ( talk) 09:22, 7 December 2020 (UTC) |
Dumelow, that is most generous of you, especially as you did most of the heavy lifting for this. Thank you. Gog the Mild ( talk) 12:00, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
I happened to be looking at the Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Featured log/December 2020 and saw only one FAC there; is it possible you forgot to add Honan Chapel and John Early? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 14:06, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
Gog, thank you for shepherding FAs to completion and all the other work you do. It is always a pleasure to see your byline on a page. :) Neopeius ( talk) 18:57, 7 December 2020 (UTC) |
Hey, Neopeius, you are embarrassing me. But thank you for the barnstar, which you probably know I am a sucker for, and more so for the kind words. Gog the Mild ( talk) 19:01, 7 December 2020 (UTC)
|
The Cleanup Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling over 12,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE November 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 03:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) |
![]() |
Guild of Copy Editors Leaderboard Award: Longest Article, 5th Place | |
This Leaderboard Barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copyediting one of the five longest articles – 4,896 words – during the GOCE November 2020 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! – Jonesey95 ( talk) 03:34, 8 December 2020 (UTC) |
Guild of Copy Editors December 2020 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the December GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since September 2020. Current and upcoming events
Election time: our end-of-year Election of Coordinators opened for nominations on 1 December and will close on 15 December at 23:59 (UTC). Voting opens at 00:01 the following day and will continue until 31 December at 23:59, just before Auld Lang Syne. Coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Self-nominations are welcome. If you've thought of helping out at the Guild, or know of another editor who would make a good coordinator, please consider standing for election or nominating them here. December Blitz: This will run from 13 to 19 December, and will target all Requests. Sign up now. Drive and Blitz reports
September Drive: 67 fewer articles had copy-edit templates by this month's close. Of the 27 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and 124 articles were claimed for the drive. October Blitz: this ran from 18 to 24 October, and focused on articles tagged for copy-edit in July and August 2020, and all Requests. Of the 13 who signed up, 11 editors copy-edited at least one article. 21 articles were claimed for the blitz. November Drive: Of the 18 editors who signed up, 15 copy-edited at least one article, and together claimed 134 articles. At the close of the drive, 67 fewer articles were in the backlog and we had dealt with 39 requests. Other news
Progress report: As of 09:05, 3 December 2020 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors had processed 663 requests (18 from 2019) since 1 January and there were 52 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 494 (see monthly progress graph above). Annual Report for 2020: this roundup of the year's activity at the Guild is planned for publication in late January or early February. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Seasonal tidings and cheers from your GOCE coordinators: Jonesey95, Baffle gab1978, Puddleglum2.0, Tdslk and Twofingered Typist. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:46, 8 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello! I believe we've had a few small interactions in the past and I saw your name when I was looking through the list of FAC Mentors. I know you do mostly MilHist work, but I was wondering if you'd be interested in helping/mentoring me with the goal of getting Ted Kaczynski to FA. I have no experience with FA, and I only have one GA under my belt. I believe all of the images on the page are freely licensed, with most falling into PD. The section on Industrial Society and Its Future is a bit bloated in my opinion and could use splitting, but I'm not sure there are many sources that cover the essay itself and don't point their focus more towards Kaczynski. I'd be willing to create that article (if it is determined that it's notable) and do all the other more monotonous tasks if you'd like - just looking for general guidance and making sure I don't make many "rookie mistakes." Thanks! AviationFreak 💬 11:49, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
Thanks for the ping, Gog; I really do appreciate how diligently you are checking back with reviewers, so I initially thought I would go ahead and lodge my Oppose at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Warner Bros. Movie World/archive1 because I still see issues everywhere I look. But no, not gonna do it ... because the several hours it would take me to go through that article would be unfair to the many, many worthy and well-prepared nominations on the page that I haven't had time to review, even though the nominators took the time to assure their articles were ready. The Warner Bros. FAC (along with several others currently on the page) is now over six weeks old, yet on the same day it was nominated, I stated it was not FAC ready. So, I should have Blatantly Opposed rather than be polite; clearly my fault, and I should know that as well as anyone.
While I understand that some reviewers feel OK about spending their time trying to pull prose up to standard via FAC (or supporting an article on prose only, without consideration of faulty sourcing), and I admire those reviewers and the nominator who persevere, I believe that approach results in a faulty allocation of resources and ends up discouraging reviewers from engaging (as it has me, and I wonder what effect it had on Spicy, who has turned very quickly into quite a solid reviewer). When you have to spend disproportionate time on the least prepared, one can wonder ... to what end? I have chosen instead to put my money where my mouth is, and promise to meet nominators at WP:Peer review, which I have worked to (hopefully) re-invigorate, because peer review is a better way to prepare an article for FAC, without the pressure of time constraints, resulting in a less frustrating experience for both nominators and reviewers.
Attempting to pull the prose (or worse, sourcing) up to standard while an article is at FAC often means that the significant matters that we should be looking at to merely fine tune a prepared article before it gets the star may be overlooked. As they appear to have been at Warner Bros, because I still find sub-standard prose, MOS issues, and more significantly, problems verifying content. It is just not fair to other nominators to allocate limited time to ill-prepared nominations, that would get the star faster if they were shut down sooner, and sent to Peer review where we can work without time pressure and the need to engage the cycle of re-visit, strike, review again, rinse lather and repeat. I don't mind doing that at PR-- that's what PR is for, and editors who take that route are being more respectful of everyone's reviewing time and limits, as we don't have to work under time pressure or the need to revisit at PR.
As I have time, I'll dig in again at FAC, but reminded again to lodge opposes rather than polite suggestions that the article isn't ready and should be withdrawn. This has turned into a much more serious problem at Biblical criticism, where the sourcing and source-to-text integrity problems are of more importance than for a theme park. Working on prose when multiple reviewers have invested days of time uncovering sourcing problems, and then see a FAC launched while they are in the middle of re-reviewing faulty sources, is demoralizing. And that's what is wrong with an approach that allows ill-prepared noms to stay on the page while people try to polish the prose, rather than address underlying issues that come from a hurried presentation at FAC. The instructions say (for good reasons) that articles are archived if at least one nominator feels they are ill-prepared; engaging FAC when that is not the practice is demoralizing, in particular because I end up feeling that I am taking my limited time on and rewarding (a faulty behavior) in those who haven't taken the time they should at the expense of those who have, because then I don't have time to properly review the prepared articles.
Sorry to disappoint :( I am putting this here rather than at WT:FAC, because we've had this discussion so many times already, and it goes nowhere, reviewers are discouraged and disengage, and because I did ping you to say I would review. Bst regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:47, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
The evening prior, 1 June, a special edition episode of Hey Hey It's Saturday ("Hey Hey It's Movie World") shot on-location had host Daryl Somers interview many of the celebrities in attendance, such as Eastwood and Russell.[h][21][26] The park opened to the public on 3 June.[21][27] Between 400 and 500 new jobs were created upon its opening."The evening prior" sentence is ... ugh. And were the jobs "created upon its opening"? I doubt it ... they most likely had to hire the people before they opened. I find things like that everywhere, but because the sources gave me nothing but a white screen, I couldn't even decipher how to begin prose repair, without resorting to a lot of template: request quote. The persistence and patience of this editor is an example of why I feel more obliged to give my limited time to an editor who works problematic articles through PR, rather than expecting them to be pulled up via FAC, where reviewers have to return again and again to strike, respond, etc. Separately (not related to this particular FAC), I wish we could get away from the legacy a certain group of editors left upon FAC, by chasing off any reviewer they disliked or who took their prose to task, assuring that most reviewers wouldn't go near their work, and used FAC as a lengthy prose nitpick on their route to pushing each others sub-par prose up the line to TFA ... but hey, that strategy worked for them, so why wouldn't others try it? Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 16:37, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
I am writing every commenter on the FAC that someone is complaining about the length of the FAC so I am asking everyone if they have any comments that can be moved to the Talk page instead. I would deeply appreciate anything you can do to help with this issue. Thank you. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 21:44, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
You said there was not consensus to support, but all the reviews on the actual review page were support. Two of the reviewers were almost done but hadn't completed their reviews yet. They had slowed down, but it's the holidays, and I was cutting them some slack and not complaining. If you had said something, either to them or me, I would have said something to them as well. I know Axl wanted to finish, and I feel confident those last two reviews would have supported, but we'll never know because they never got asked if they wanted to finish or not.
You said BC may have come to FAC too soon, and since Sandy was the only editor who ever made that comment, I assume you were responding to her off page comments. Her criticism of the article may have been fair when the article first came to FAC, but by the end, all the issues were dealt with, so by the time you closed it, they were no longer applicable. Sandy said there was OR in the article. That was one place where I used emphasis on one word. Sandy said that was editorializing, which was the same as OR. That definition is not in the MOS on emphasis - or anywhere else that I can find - but I took it out anyway, so that became a moot point. She said I had misused sources because I had included references for scholars who don't have wiki pages yet. She said those pages qualified as self-published, so I removed them all, so that too was a moot point by the time you closed the FAC. She said there was inconsistency in the referencing style referring to the fact that when one author was referenced multiple times, rp was used, and it wasn't used if an author was only referenced once. According to the Teahouse, where I got that, and the MOS, that's the way rp is supposed to be used. She doesn't like rp, and wants all the rp's replaced, but there was no consensus for that. She wanted to split the article, and strongly disliked its length. I gave multiple reasons why I thought splitting was a bad idea, but I said I would go with the consensus. There was no consensus for splitting it.
By the time the FAC was closed, all her issues had been addressed one way or the other. That may have been a valid discussion for you at FAC to have about the condition BC came in, but by the end of its nine weeks, they were not valid reasons to close it.
I am taking a break for awhile and am probably done with BC and FAC. I invested too much in it, months and months of my life. I will probably be back in the new year, but I won't be working on this article anymore. I need to let it go. It's sad for me, but it's also sad for WP I think, because this article deserves to be listed among its best, and if it had been given one or two more weeks for the last reviewers to finish and offer the support I think they would have, I think it would have been. I'm sorry it didn't get that chance.
I hope you and yours have a wonderful holiday season. I wish you all the best. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 19:46, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I hope you don't mind, but I have now posted your essay on my page with its link. Thank you for that! I loved it. I had a harasser instead of a mentor. He ran me of for two years. I'm afraid that happens at least as often as your experience. But at least I'm back - for now anyway - and have found some exceptional people through FAC. I will endeavor to persevere and do the next thing. Thanx again.
Jenhawk777 (
talk)
21:58, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
Is there a reason, why you add new entries with "Nov" ( 1 & [6], when it's already December? Regards, Armbrust The Homunculus 19:19, 10 December 2020 (UTC)
On 11 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Women's poll tax repeal movement, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after U.S. women secured the right to vote in 1920, those from the South fought against paying a poll tax for the next 40 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Women's poll tax repeal movement. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Women's poll tax repeal movement), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 11 December 2020 (UTC)
I am having an outside social distancing bonfire progressive dinner party tonight (a whole new post-COVID world), but should be able to review, maybe even two or three, tomorrow ... please give me a hint on several FACs where review is most needed, as I am now behind on the entire page, and would rather start back in where you are most lacking ... I usually end up stuck with the hurricanes :) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:25, 12 December 2020 (UTC)
On 13 December 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Inverkeithing, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the Battle of Inverkeithing, Oliver Cromwell deliberately left open a route for the Scottish army to invade England? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Inverkeithing. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Inverkeithing), and it may be added to the statistics page if it received over 400 views per hour. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:02, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
Could you please close the FAC for Meteorological history of Hurricane Michael? People have brought up this shouldn't exist even if the main article is significantly expanded on. Guess I will see you guys again in maybe 2 weeks then. Noah Talk 12:40, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
22:49, 13 December 2020 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Mercenary War article has been scheduled as today's featured article for Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 15, 2021 following the scuttling of the USS Illiniois Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:28, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
I came across your name at Wikipedia:Good article help/mentor. The GA review of King Ludwig Oak has been abandoned by the new editor Cobalt03 who decided to review yesterday due to some problems as stated on my talk page. See the communication at User_talk:Amkgp#Your_GA_nomination_of_King_Ludwig_Oak. As of now it looks as if someone is actively reviewing which is absolutely not. Please help. Thank you — Amkgp 💬 17:23, 15 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello hardworking editor! Can you help us to rescuing sources of two articles Censorship in Iran and Internet censorship in Iran? I try to do that but the IABot says you haven't permission. Could you do it please. Thanks for your editing articles with complete information.-- Arash00011 ( talk) 13:32, 16 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Half Barnstar |
Many thanks for helping me get Battle of Powick Bridge over the line and reach Featured status. Your frequent help and support is always appreciated, by me and others. Harrias (he/him) • talk 09:39, 18 December 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks Harrias: I butcher your FAC and you give me a barnstar. That seems wrong somehow. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:53, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Heraklion 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
21:41, 18 December 2020 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Heraklion you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Heraklion for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
19:41, 19 December 2020 (UTC)
You are much better than me at figuring out how to search stuff on here, especially if it has to do with titles and such. Do we have an article that explains the interrelations of the various monarchies of Europe and how that perpetuated foreigners ruling in various countries? SusunW ( talk) 18:40, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Trade and the prevalence of "foreign rule" spread these customary practices for marriage and inheritance throughout Europeis what we're focused on and the Brill piece's 1st 2 paragraphs explain fairly beautifully how countries were passed from empire to empire (because some French dude became the monarch in England and then that person was replaced by some Dutch dude, who married some Spanish royalty, whose kids hooked up with a German, and then married a Russian). LOL SusunW ( talk) 20:28, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Rethymno 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
22:01, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Congratulations! With 6,230 views, your Battle of Inverkeithing hook is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of December. Accordingly, it has been included at DYKSTATS December. It had a really intriguing twist that made one want to click to find out, "Why would Cromwell have done that?" Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 22:27, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
You are witnessing the diligence of Ajpolino at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buruli ulcer/archive1; he never does anything haphazardly, and every word is carefully considered, which is only a small part of why I co-nommed at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Ajpolino. It may take him some time to get through the issues raised, but the wait will be worth it :) SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 23:42, 20 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I've made a map of Roman Africa in 146 BC, if you want to add it to the articles on the PW. T8612 (talk) 15:37, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
The Purple Barnstar | |
I hereby award you the Tyrian purple barnstar, for your successful Punic Wars franchise (a bit obscure reference, but " Phoenicia" supposedly relates to Greek for purple)! FunkMonk ( talk) 18:02, 28 November 2020 (UTC) |
Thank you FunkMonk, I feel approproatly porphyrogénnētos Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:07, 28 November 2020 (UTC)
I've always appreciated your and other editors abilities to work on high-level topics like whole wars and campaigns and the really major battles. My limitations keeping me on brief cavalry skirmishes and obscure artillery batteries makes me almost feel like I'm not pulling my weight.
Hog Farm
Bacon
23:32, 21 December 2020 (UTC)
Hello Gog, would you be interested in writing the articles related to the Third Macedonian War (171-167 BC), with the battles of Callinicus and Pydna? The current articles are just paraphrases of Livy, but I have in pdf a very good and recent source: Paul Burton Rome and the Third Macedonian War (2017). There were four battles at most during the war so it may be easier to promote it to a featured topic that the Second Punic War. Unfortunately, the main sources for the the first two Macedonian Wars are the very expensive History of Macedonia by NGL Hammond and the Commentaries on Livy by John Briscoe. Both are also useful for the 3rd MW, but aren't as detailed (Hammond) or consistent (Briscoe) as Burton's book. T8612 (talk) 15:19, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Best Wishes,
Lee Vilenski (
talk •
contribs) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Have a great time over the holidays. Keep up the good work in all that you do. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 18:11, 23 December 2020 (UTC)
Enjoy the holiday season, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. It's been a wild year, and I wanted to take a moment to thank you for your contributions and for the role you play in making Wikipedia as good as it can be. Gog, you really are one of my favorite users here, and I've benefited greatly from your advisement on countless articles. I have great respect for the sheer amount and quality of work you do. It was a pleasure interacting with you this year. I wish you and your loved ones all the best this December and in the years to come. Cheers, Eddie891 Talk Work 19:12, 23 December 2020 (UTC) PS: Do you remember the Battle of Calais? One of our first interactions, If memory serves-- the bit about it being around Christmas has always stood out to me-- it's a christmas battle, like Die Hard is a Christmas movie.
Donner60 (
talk) is wishing a foaming mug of
Seasons Greetings! Whether you celebrate your hemisphere's
Solstice or
Christmas,
Diwali,
Hogmanay,
Hanukkah,
Lenaia,
Festivus or even the
Saturnalia, this is a special time of year for almost everyone!
Spread the holiday cheer by adding {{ subst: User:WereSpielChequers/Dec20}} to your friends' talk pages.
No images, fancy backgrounds or fancy code in those curly bracket things. Just a boring old plain text note wishing you a very peaceful Christmas season, and a Better New Year. Cheers GirthSummit (blether) 11:18, 24 December 2020 (UTC)
![]() |
Natalis soli invicto! | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and distraction-free. Ealdgyth ( talk) 14:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC) |
Thanks Ealdgyth, and a very merry Yuletide to you too. Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:50, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
@ Buidhe, Nikkimaria, Ian Rose, and Ealdgyth:, SandyGeorgia has flagged up an issue at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/American logistics in the Northern France campaign/archive1 which I think could do with some further discussion away from that FAC, and possibly, initially, away from FAC altogether - at least initially. (Obviously, if itis agreed that there is an issue worth community discussion it needs to be posted there.) Sandy, re the ACR issue, can you hold fire on that? Once we have got somewhere with this discussion, we can discuss it in detail on the MilHist talk page. I will wish to do this anyway, but would prefer one thing at a time.
Sandy has developed qualms about various aspects of the sourcing of an experienced nominator. Far from the first time this has happened, eg see my very own Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Third Punic War/archive1. Specifically, as I understand it, questions are being raised as to:
Comments are welcome. Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:49, 25 December 2020 (UTC)
The issue with hesitation to do source reviewers can be addressed by encouraging splitting it up. E.g. one person addresses the print sources, another person does source checks, a third looks at web sources. That way, people who maybe don't have the time or confidence to complete the entire thing can still contribute. This might also encourage more thoroughness rather than superficial checking it off. ( t · c) buidhe 18:13, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
I feel like everything above is missing the issue which brought this to concern, which is missing or unrepresented sources leading to an imbalance and POV. No amount of checking sources that are used will turn those up. You have to go out and look for them. C.J. Dick's POV was that "Eisenhower was wrong"; scores of other sources have other opinions. I notice Buidhe makes reviews to that effect, at least at FAR. In the three POV FACs I have encountered, it was the lack of viewpoints that created the POV problem. I think a lot of this comes down to reviewers being hesitant these days to do anything more than a cursory look at prose nitpicking because of some past treatment of reviewers who did more. I am also concerned that once a nominator hits a certain number of FAs, their nominations are no longer closely scrutinized; we assume they know their stuff, and don't dig. SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:36, 27 December 2020 (UTC)
Hi Gog, do you think I can reorganise the list of History FAs here? It is difficult to look for something in that wall of blue. I'm thinking of four sections (Ancient, Medieval, Early Modern, Modern). Strangely, Paleocene is in History, while it should go in Geology. T8612 (talk) 01:11, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
Would I be able to re-nominate in less than two weeks? Say, in one week? LittleJerry ( talk) 23:50, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history " Military Historian of the Year" and " Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team
![]() |
2020 Military Historian of the Year | |
As voted by your peers within the Military history WikiProject, I hereby award you the Silver Wiki for coming in second place in the 2020 Military Historian of the Year Award. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions throughout the year. Eddie891 Talk Work 13:46, 31 December 2020 (UTC) |
Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 11:11, 1 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the barnstar - always good for morale! Perhaps you can give me some advice since my former mentor Buckshot06 seems to have gone off the grid? Firstly, on three occasions recently I have been preparing to add some material on artillery regiments, only to find that the pages on the parent units have been deleted. These were: 1st Dumbartonshire Rifle Volunteers, 3rd (Ulster) Searchlight Regiment, Royal Artillery, and 6th Cyclist Battalion, Suffolk Regiment. From what I can discover, these were deleted because of serious copyright offences by the author, not because of quality. I have sufficient material to provide new articles on these units, but what is the protocol: should I go ahead, or wait a certain length of time in case the original articles might be reinstated on appeal?
Conversely, I have found that someone has posted an article on 102nd (Ulster) Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery (incorrect title) when there was an existing article on 102nd Heavy Anti-Aircraft Regiment, Royal Artillery (correct title, and linked into other articles and categories). How do I flag this up for possible merger?
I'm happy to go on quietly filling gaps in wiki's coverage, but these are murky waters! Regards Rickfive ( talk)
![]() |
The Guidance Barnstar | |
You know that there are many things I would not even attempt without your mentoring and guidance. I truly appreciate the effort you put in and the humor you bring to stressful situations, which lighten the load considerably. I will never be able to adequately express my gratitude, just know that I am beholden to you. SusunW ( talk) 19:40, 6 January 2021 (UTC) |
So I guess you thought it prudent to overlook my comment here, which was probably a kindness on your part, so thank you. I was pretty crushed at the time. Do you still want to work with me on your article, or have you changed your mind? I still feel the same way about working with you, I would be honored, but I understand if you'd rather not. Jenhawk777 ( talk) 06:10, 8 January 2021 (UTC)
I think I must have offended you more deeply than I have understood. I am genuinely sorry for that as it was not my intention. I know that you do not deserve that. Please forgive my bull-in-the-china-shop ways. I am often socially inept and clueless. Feel free to yell at me all I deserve. I'm sure I would benefit from being yelled at by you. I am truly sorry.
Jenhawk777 (
talk)
21:44, 11 January 2021 (UTC) has extended an
olive branch of peace.
Oops. It is I who owe you an apology. I saw the red bell and clicked through to your message. Decided that it would need more than an off the cuff response so I would just finish what I was doing. Then one thing led to another and I forgot. I have got myself over-committed on Wikipedia and non-routine things keep slipping through the cracks. Sorry.
Re the article. Yes, I would still like to work with with you on it, if you would still like to work with me after my carelessness. I have done little work on it since we last spoke, and that mostly on the religious side. I do have some sources lined up for "my" side of things though. It is now bedtime, my time, and I have RL commitments for much of tomorrow. I shall try to make a start on it tomorrow evening, and either way I shall let you know how I am doing. If I don't, a firm smack round the head with that olive branch should gain my attention. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:42, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the WikiChevrons for participating in 33 reviews between October and December 2020. Peacemaker67 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 06:43, 10 January 2021 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
Congrats for the upcoming Mercenary war FA main page appearance and thank you for all your work. ~ Elias Z. ( talkallam) 11:45, 11 January 2021 (UTC) |
Wow! Someone cares. Thank you Elias Ziade, much appreciated.
[shameless plug] If you feel like helping to improve an article, then
Battle of the Saw is
currently at FAC.
[/shameless plug].
Gog the Mild (
talk)
11:55, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Belated Holiday Greetings to you and yours. You are next in line for an Eddy (next week) but I was hoping you would relinquish your place in the Q for those from last year. A couple of new ones were added today which eased my mind. New noms are always welcome. Thanks for all you do!!! ― Buster7 ☎ 18:24, 11 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I noticed that the disambiguation article I created yesterday is linked to your task page. Which siege were you referring to as a potential article? Regards Newm30 ( talk) 22:03, 12 January 2021 (UTC)
This has had two source reviews - if you're still looking for something in that regard, would you be able to specify what that is? Nikkimaria ( talk) 01:53, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm probably going to close the review and nominate the article for FA, do you want time to add any more comments? Amitchell125 ( talk) 22:13, 13 January 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Premium Reviewer Barnstar | |
In recognition of the 128 incredibly incisive and helpful Milhist GAN, ACR, PR and FA reviews you did in 2020, I hereby award you the Premium Reviewer Barnstar. Bloody good effort! Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 01:37, 14 January 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Gog! Can you pls check the minor tweaks I just did on Siege of Tunis (Mercenary War) - if they are OK I'll do same for tomorrow's TFA? JennyOz ( talk) 13:45, 14 January 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for the article Mercenary War, introduced: "The First Punic War ended after 23 years with a Carthaginian defeat. Still a great power, Carthage arranged to pay off its army and ship its members home. One botched attempt to shortchange the troops later and the army was blockading Carthage and its African vassals had risen in revolt to join the mutineers with 70,000 volunteers. The war was fought with unusual savagery, even for the time." - That's what we see on Wikipedia's 20 birthday ;) - I have a director to offer for DYK (next set), had a conductor 5 years ago, and the complete works by Bach 10 years ago, all less bloody. Today's intention: not to end the day without a FAC nom. I'm procrastinating, but Jerome Kohl, the effort of many, was worth it, - more help welcome. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:45, 15 January 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
00:06, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
this edit you made on the Exersice tiger page. [1]
Your reference wasn't clear as to what it was, article, book etc but I found it here. [2]
It mentions Operation Tiger 11 pages after the page you reference but says "The incident passed without repercussions." The document does not connect Tiger to that one sentence on page 259 saying he had an increased interest in Normany in any fashion. It makes no judgment at all on the reason. The document does not connect the to things at all. This is the problem with people using sources that are hard to check, like you saying what you wrote was on that page. Actually what you wrote was a total fabrication on your part and i want to know why you did it. If I missed something point it out. Jackhammer111 ( talk) 00:50, 16 January 2021 (UTC).
References
While what I wrote to you before and I'm writing to you now is sternly worded I don't consider it a personal attack. If you're objecting to the word fabrication and I stand by the word because you reach the conclusion that you put on that page that was not supported by your reference. I'm sure you know Wikipedia policy on original research. A lot of men died needlessly in this rehearsal. We shouldn't be saying that this caused more needless deaths on D-Day unless that's really what happened. I'd appreciate it if you were the one that removes this instead of me so it doesn't look like I've taken the second step towards an edit War. We can continue to discuss it if you like. By the way oh, this was a pain in the ass for me to research. I found a copy of the ebook that I downloaded from my library but my eReader doesn't show page numbers.. Slow and bulky. I kind of blew my day. I'm just bitching, I'm not blaming you. Jackhammer111 ( talk) 23:16, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Rethymno you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Rethymno for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
19:22, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hey Gog, I'm helping out with WP:URFA/2020, and there are some very old FAs (promoted around 2006) that use Xenophon/Thucydides/etc. rather uncritically and directly as sources for historical events, rather than modern secondary sources. I have a suspiscion that heavy direct usage of the ancient writers may not be a good thing for FAs, but I thought you and @ T8612: might have more experience with this area and subject, so I'd like to know y'all's opinions. Hog Farm Bacon 19:57, 16 January 2021 (UTC)
Hello! I contacted you a little over a month ago about getting Ted Kaczynski to FA. I've gone through your suggestions and had a Copyedit done by the GOCE, and I think the article may be ready for FAC. Twofingered Typist's edit was wonderful, and they ironed out quite a few issues in the article. Let me know what you think as far as how to proceed. Thanks! AviationFreak 💬 17:01, 18 January 2021 (UTC)
On 19 January 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Siege of Guines (1352), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1352 Siege of Guines reignited the Hundred Years' War after six years of uneasy truce? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Siege of Guines (1352). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Siege of Guines (1352)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:03, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, are you still copy-editing Jupiter for the GOCE? The request at REQ has been marked as working since 6 January. Cheers, Baffle☿gab 19:23, 19 January 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I originally brought this up to Ian Rose ( here at their talk page) after being advised to consult one of the project coordinators. An editor from the jazz project appears to have hijacked my nomination of this article with relentless, disparaging, uncivil comments with the intention of removing references to the genre (to which reliable sources are attributed). Their comments section has become bloated, intractable, and unapproachable, and I am worried it's a blight on the nomination and might alienate serious reviewers from taking on the article. I've cited issues with their comments at Ian Rose's talk page, and this latest comment shows the editor will not back down. So I am now here. isento ( talk) 02:28, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I even tried to distinguish the entirely genre/jazz-focused section by titling it "Genre comments by...", and the editor reverted me with the edit summary "these comments transcend genre" ( [7]). The editor is indulging, escalating, and imploding with each comment. It is disturbing. I can't recall ever encountering such a singular resistance and personalized determination to force one's agenda or ideology at an FAC. Maybe in general. isento ( talk) 03:29, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
He referred to one reliably sourced statement as "a bullshit statement in a bullshit article" ( [8]) isento ( talk) 04:33, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
I've perused a few of the FA-reviewing guidelines, including this one, which says comments must be actionable, otherwise they won't be considered in determining a nomination's promotion. Their comments are not even approachable. I hesitated to respond again to that editor, because they can't seem to control their aggression and attitude. I feel some kind of intervention is necessary at this point. isento ( talk) 03:34, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
An antagonistic soliloquy. That is the best way of describing what they've turned the section into. isento ( talk) 05:58, 21 January 2021 (UTC)
"Was "Cyrenaica Command" the formal and official title?"
I just wanted to follow-up about this point. Yes, it was the formal and official title. Am I missing something in the article about that, or need to tweak something?
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
You have certainly had your hand in what I would consider an insane amount of FAs and GAs. As that meme goes, "Just take my [barnstar]!"
Hoping to add to your 2021 bling
|
TheSandDoctor Thank you, much appreciated. For still being in January my 2021 Bling Bar is accumulating nicely. I try to keep my total of GAs and FAs ticking over. Not that I'm obsessed. Oh no. I can give it up any time I want to. Any time. Yes. Any time at all. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:33, 24 January 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, November – December 2020
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 14:00, 25 January 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Ian Ross Campbell (cropped).jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).
Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. -- B-bot ( talk) 03:26, 2 February 2021 (UTC)
On 3 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Treaty of Guînes, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the English and French agreed to a draft treaty in 1354 to end what was to become the Hundred Years' War, but the French reneged and the war continued for a further 101 years? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Treaty of Guînes. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Treaty of Guînes), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:02, 3 February 2021 (UTC)
On 5 February 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Kinghorn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after losing the Battle of Kinghorn in 1332, the Earl of Fife was "full of shame" at being defeated by such a small force? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Kinghorn. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Kinghorn), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:02, 5 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with oak leaves | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Oak Leaves for Battle of the Saw, Spendius, and Battle of Heraklion. Peacemaker67 ( talk) via MilHistBot ( talk) 00:30, 7 February 2021 (UTC) |
Gog, this is just a curious question - in the GA articles that you rewrote, how did you get all the non-JSTOR sources? Were you reading a lot about them (eg. the Punic Wars) at the time, or is there a simpler way of just accessing relevant sources for a particular need? Thanks in advance. HalfdanRagnarsson ( talk) 10:02, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
(Specifically, I mean the book sources.) HalfdanRagnarsson ( talk) 10:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
You're mentioned, incase you didn't know and are interested in such things. Gråbergs Gråa Sång ( talk) 19:04, 8 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for your Bach reminder! I hope to get to the hymn and the discography, don't know about reception yet, really, - just today was another day of following an obituary, a very unusual one. Bach music pictured -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:28, 9 February 2021 (UTC)
The very unusual biography is now on the Main page. The hymn and the discography are expanded. I am still unhappy about having to move the discography to a separate article because one user claims that the original source for the article, from the Bach Cantata Website, is not reliable, while my evaluation seems to be shared by reliable sources, see here:
I found that by chance when looking for recordings. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 09:59, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Update: the tags are gone, and Aza and Wehwalt began rewiewing. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 23:23, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for Siege of Lilybaeum, introduced "For those not yet surfeited on First Punic War articles, I offer this relatively short article on Rome's nine-year-long attempt to end the war by capturing one of Carthage's last two strongholds on Sicily"! A great offer! I am sorry to report that my offer is at a hold because FS is busy elsewhere, and I (and Aza24) don't know what to do. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:20, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Today, we have a DYK about Wilhelm Knabe, who stood up for future with the striking school children when he was in his 90s, - a model, - see here. - Further down on the page, there are conversations about the current arb case request - I feel I have to stay away - in a nutshell: "... will not improve kindness, nor any article". - Yesterday, I made sure on a hike that the flowers are actually blooming ;) - The FAC situation looks much better. I wonder why we had a peer review ... - sorry that the FAC turned into one. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 15:19, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Your DYK hook about the Battle of Kinghorn received 6,372 page views (531 per hour) while on the Main Page. It is the one of most viewed hooks during the month of February and has thus earned a place on the February stats list. Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 17:47, 11 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear Gog the Mild. Thank you for having made yourself available for FA mentoring! I am a novice with just over 6000 edits and one very recent GA: Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty. I now wonder about FA. The article is on the waiting list for copy-editing by GOCE. Perhaps I should also put it on the list for Peer Review, but I am a bit hesitant to ask so many people for help and time. Could you please have a quick look and tell me what you think. With many thanks and best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 16:40, 14 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Modest Barnstar | |
This barnstar is awarded to Gog the Mild for copy edits totaling over 4,000 words (including bonus and rollover words) during the GOCE January 2021 Backlog Elimination Drive. Congratulations, and thank you for your contributions! Reidgreg ( talk) 18:56, 15 February 2021 (UTC) |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
14:58, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:02, 21 February 2021 (UTC)
![]() | March 2021 Backlog Drive As you have taken part in previous GAN Backlog drives, or are a prolific GAN reviewer, you might be interested to know that the March 2021 GAN Backlog Drive starts on March 1, and will continue until the end of the month. |
( t · c) buidhe 04:28, 22 February 2021 (UTC)
Dear Gog the Mild. We are one step further. Twofingered Typist has been professional and thorough: quite a few changes. I learned a couple of things. I have tried my hand at A-Class Review: Uganda–Tanzania War by user Indy beetle. Buidhe and Eddie891 have also reviewed, but this review seems to have gone asleep. Best regards, Johannes Schade ( talk) 18:22, 26 February 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Dupplin Moor 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
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
10:40, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Dupplin Moor 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:Battle of Dupplin Moor for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
12:00, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Round 1 of the competition has finished; it was a high-scoring round with 21 contestants scoring more than 100 points. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 55 contestants qualifying. You will need to finish among the top thirty-two contestants in Round 2 if you are to qualify for Round 3. Our top scorers in Round 1 were:
These contestants, like all the others, now have to start again from scratch. In Round 1, contestants achieved eight featured articles, three featured lists and one featured picture, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. They completed 97 good article reviews, nearly double the 52 good articles they claimed. Contestants also claimed for 135 featured article and featured list candidate reviews. There is no longer a requirement to mention your WikiCup participation when undertaking these reviews.
Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or something else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.
If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth ( talk). MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:26, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Dupplin Moor you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Battle of Dupplin Moor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Willbb234 --
Willbb234 (
talk)
18:02, 2 March 2021 (UTC)
Are you familiar with this author? War against Nabis is an old featured article I checked for WP:URFA/2020, and I listed it as needing a featured article review if work is not done at WP:FARGIVEN. The fact that whole sections are sourced solely to Livy and the rather dated Dictionary of Greek and Roman Biography and Mythology are enough to warrant the FAR notice, but I'm trying to determine the full extent of the issues. Holleaux is an older source, but it's possible they could still be fine. Are you familiar with how useful that author is? Hog Farm Talk 03:25, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
On 3 March 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1356 Henry of Lancaster marched an English expedition through Normandy 330 miles (530 km) in 22 days while successfully avoiding battle with the French king's far larger army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (ie, 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:03, 3 March 2021 (UTC)
Help, help, help! Gog the Mild ( talk) 15:11, 4 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Editor of the Week | |
Your ongoing efforts to improve the encyclopedia have not gone unnoticed: You have been selected as Editor of the Week in recognition of your fellowship with others. Thank you for the great contributions! (courtesy of the Wikipedia Editor Retention Project) |
User:Buster7 submitted the following nomination for Editor of the Week:
You can copy the following text to your user page to display a user box proclaiming your selection as Editor of the Week:
{{User:UBX/EoTWBox}}
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Military History Project |
Gog the Mild |
Editor of the Week for the week beginning March 07, 2021 |
The scale and quality of Gog's contributions in many topics and interests are impeccable. Plus, he appreciates fellow editors with words (and awards) of encouragement. His lists of promoted articles and draft main page blurbs (and, especially, its archive}, are impressive. He finished in second place in the 2020 Military Historian of the Year Award. 32 Featured Articles and 81 Good Articles. Known for his tactful, honest and knowledgeable advice. |
Recognized for |
contributing to WP:DYK, Featured article candidates, and Military History |
Notable work |
helping a group of university students learn how to use Wikipedia |
Submit a nomination |
Thanks again for your efforts! ― Buster7 ☎ 15:03, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the February 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 47 points from 6 articles. Congratulations, Eddie891 Talk Work 17:04, 7 March 2021 (UTC) |
I am slowly advancing through the Americas, but now I have arrived at the US and oh my. Our articles are terrifically conflated. I really, really did not want to have to rewrite existing articles, merely to add information to them, but I am bamfoozled on this one. Nationality is who belongs. Citizenship is what you get for belonging. But both the United States nationality law and Citizenship of the United States cover a whole lot of the same information because of an apparent misunderstanding of the terms. I don't want to rewrite two articles, so I want to know how to determine who are the most prolific contributors to the citizenship article. If I know that, perhaps I can get them to assist with that one so that the who and the what are clear to readers. Do you know how to do that? SusunW ( talk) 17:46, 7 March 2021 (UTC)
Just archive it now so less time will be wasted waiting to renominate. isento ( talk) 16:48, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Will they? Is that reviewer going to be there again? isento ( talk) 17:01, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
Some of those sources are pretty crucial. And they didn't elaborate on why they questioned their quality. What exactly am I supposed to do with that? isento ( talk) 17:04, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I could of course replace some of the references to AllMusic, even though one reviewer demonstrated at the review how it actually is a good source. But I doubt that would be enough to dispel the air of concern the original source reviewer cast on the nom a long time ago. isento ( talk) 17:08, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
I believe I have justified the questioned sources' reliability and quality. At the original reviewer's section, the next source reviewer's section, with another reviewer echoing one particular source's reliability. Yes, please reread. Thank you. And if the nominator need not do more than they have done, they should not say they will. And for the record, that is not my experience with source reviewers. Others have offered more detail and thought in their responses. isento ( talk) 17:30, 13 March 2021 (UTC)
If you say so isento ( talk) 15:45, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of the Saw article has been scheduled as today's featured article for April 21, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:11, 15 March 2021 (UTC)
This really shouldn't have been promoted... there were still unaddressed sourcing concerns, including a major one with the frequent use of a self-published book. What's the point of source reviews if they're ignored when the find unresolved issues? Aza24 ( talk) 00:10, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Gog, I am reluctant to bring this up now considering you are already dealing with the (fill in the adjective) posts a few sections above this one about source reviews, and I don't want to add to that unnecessary burden. But because those posts and this issue relate to what I have been trying to further (more help on source reviews along with a more active peer review), I am confused and dejected more so than concerned. I feel like I no longer understand what FAC is. Here's where recent FAC decisions confuse me:
It looks like we now have a default in favor of lengthy FACs, even when they did all the hard work off-FAC, and appear at FAC prepared. At the same time that other nominators are seeing their articles promoted as soon as they have the bare minimum of support, even with outstanding issues on the page. This is confusing and discouraging, at least to me, as I am working as hard as I can (three weeks off notwithstanding per computer repair) to promote a more active Peer review and to encourage source reviewers. It seems that with these examples we are not only going sideways on the very things I am working to improve, but also seeing a default that favors lengthy FACs even when they prepared off-FAC. Can you see why I am confused, and discouraged, by this? I know you to be conscientious and diligent in all of your work, and very much appreciate that, so I hope you can give me some feedback such that I won't feel my peer review and source review work has been futile. Why is Heart of Thomas stalled, when the other two went through as soon as they had the bare minimum, even with outstanding concerns? Am I working in the wrong directions? Are our views about how FAC should function so different that I should think about working elsewhere ? Best regards, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 14:11, 18 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I have a feeling that the spot check on the Tibesti Mountains FAC might be a little intimidating given that about a quarter of the sources are in French. I've heard that requesting reviews is frowned upon, and so I was wondering whether you think it would be appropriate to ping a French-language reviewer, such as Nikkimaria, to ask whether they might have time to squeeze in a spot check. I wouldn't expect to get a support out of a spot check, so perhaps a request of this sort would be more ethical. Thanks for all your work at FAC. Brycehughes ( talk) 06:58, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Your DYK hook about Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 drew 5,308 page views (442 per hour) while on the Main Page. It is one of the most viewed hooks for the month of March as shown at Wikipedia:Did you know/Statistics#March 2021. Keep up the great work! Cbl62 ( talk) 21:23, 19 March 2021 (UTC)
Hello, how are you? I saw your comments in the Blond Ambition Tour FA nomination page; I agree it's not ready; I wish to withdraw the nomination, can you tell me how? Thank you!! -- Christian ( talk) 20:01, 20 March 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 42, January – February 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:27, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:56, 22 March 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you for labouring with Bach's cantata composed for today, - perhaps listen. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:34, 25 March 2021 (UTC)
... and the first performance was on a Palm Sunday which is today, and Yoninah's obituary with the beginning of Passover today - putting some little ego-battles in perspective -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 21:59, 28 March 2021 (UTC)
Jo-Jo Eumerus ( talk) 15:26, 26 March 2021 (UTC)
Why did you archive “Cups”? I thought you were giving 2 days? The Ultimate Boss ( talk) 10:27, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Crap. I didn’t mean it. That’s why I reverted it. Ceoil was being awesome and helping me out. The Ultimate Boss ( talk) 10:33, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
I just signed my name in blood on the nom page that will work with Ultimate Boss before the next, hopefully successful nom. I am optimistic, there is easily enough rel source material for a FA, and my long promised ce is in process. I may cut back on some of the stats, esp in the lead, but this is doable. Boss...lets keep in contact before any more promotions, pls....and sorry for being silent these last few months, I can imagine that was frustrating. Ceoil ( talk) 17:40, 27 March 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, the April 2021 WikiProject Military History Reviewing Drive begins at 00:01 UTC on April 1, 2021 and runs through 23:59 UTC on April 31, 2021. Points can be earned through reviewing articles on the AutoCheck report, reviewing articles listed at WP:MILHIST/ASSESS, reviewing MILHIST-tagged articles at WP:GAN or WP:FAC, and reviewing articles submitted at WP:MILHIST/ACR. Service awards and barnstars are given for set points thresholds, and the top three finishers will receive further awards. To participate, sign up at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_History/April 2021 Reviewing Drive#Participants and create a worklist at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/April 2021 Reviewing Drive/Worklists (examples are given). Further details can be found at the drive page. Questions can be asked at the drive talk page. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 17:24, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
...and trying my hardest to write in British English. It's a nightmare. Just saying, when the foremost expert on British Nationality writes the "Naturalization Act" allowed persons to "naturalise" how the heck am I, a mere Southernese-English speaker supposed to know how the heck to translate stuff from normal English to British English? I have decided just to write them the best I can and leave it to someone else to figure it out and pretty up. o.O 24 done and only like 170 to go ... progress of a sort. Hope all is well with you. SusunW ( talk) 21:22, 31 March 2021 (UTC)
Hi. I have noted your recent terrific work and efforts in editing. would you be interested in serving in the role of "coordinator" at WP:HIST? please let me know. Please ping me when you reply. thanks! -- Sm8900 ( talk)
![]() | |
Three years! |
---|
Musing about the TFA on my talk, please help watching. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:07, 4 April 2021 (UTC)
On the main page today: an article about music significant in my life, Bach's motet Jesu, mein Freude, one of the strangest histories from the start in 2006 to the Main page today! Perhaps it will make it to FA some day ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 18:37, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for Battle of the Saw, introduced with thanks: "Ancient Carthaginians again. Hannibal's father making his name during a nasty episode in a nasty war."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:37, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
@ Serial Number 54129: OK, so I totally missed this until just now. You didn't make it big enough. Thank you, I am impressed. Now I need to work out how to get it out of my monitor so that I can eat it. Gog the Mild ( talk) 17:52, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Gog, on this one I slipped while trying to type edit summary "don't make the lead about the term". On this one of yours, are you now OK going back to lowercase siege? Dicklyon ( talk) 16:59, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, sorry to bother you. Just a quick question about the sources you use. Do you borrow them from a library, buy them for a specific article, or already have them in your possession? I'd like to know so that I can decide what's best when expanding articles using book sources in the future. Kind regards, Willbb234 Talk (please {{ ping}} me in replies) 19:55, 15 April 2021 (UTC)
In Battle of Rethymno , "The German 2/I Battalion dug in on the hilltop having suffered 400 dead or wounded."
Are those casualties cause from attacking "Hill A" or Defending "Hill A" From Australian counter-attack ?
Thank you.-- Comrade John ( talk) 12:45, 17 April 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
02:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
As you might have noticed, most of my battle-related content work is for article subjects with not a whole lot that has been written about them, but I've finally been working on one this year that actually has quite a bit of coverage - the Battle of Raymond. It's part of the Vicksburg campaign, which is one of the most-written events in the whole ACW. While there aren't any stand-alone scholarly works about Raymond (there's a self-published book by a guy with no real credentials and a short one by a hyperlocal battlefield friends group that this basically self-published), just about any book about the Vicksburg campaign will have at least several pages about Raymond. And there's just no real way to be able to access every single work about Vicksburg. I've gotten a pretty good span of the literature through stuff I have, books I borrowed from family members, university libraries, Google books, Wikipedia Library, etc. But I'm not sure where the line of "I can't corporate everything, but I've incorporated enough" is. What's your general advice on how to tell what extent of a vast literature is enough for A-Class? Hog Farm Talk 04:38, 18 April 2021 (UTC)
I'm willing to chip in a couple a week. My internet has been running very poorly lately, so I haven't been able to monitor the FAC page much, but I'd like to still keep reviewing FACs regularly. If as coord, you see a FAC that needs some reviews, ping me over there and I'll try to get a review in. I can generally probably do a couple a week, although pop culture stuff is not an area I prefer to review in. Hog Farm Talk 21:01, 21 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog the Mild, thank you for your encouraging closing comments on the Mynors FAC. Since the nomination's closure, I've worked successfully with the reviewers at PR to address the issues they raised. I'd like to take up your offer of a new FAC for the article without the two-week hiatus. Of course, I will not go ahead with a new nomination without your approval. On the topic of additional reviewers: in addition to those who reviewed last time around, I've been assured by Ergo Sum that they will chip in. I'm also expecting a review from SandyGeorgia who didn't want to comment until after a subject specialist had had a look - this has now been done by Llywrch. My FAC mentor Gerda suggested that Eddie891 would be a good reviwer (I would contact them once the FAC has been filed). Best, Modussiccandi ( talk) 15:43, 22 April 2021 (UTC)
GtM, I see you are scheduling May. It looks like the Menstrual cycle FAR is wrapping up (it was delayed by some sock activity). I am still hoping that dementia with Lewy bodies will run on July 21, so with the goal to spread out our limited medical content (every two months), it would be good to either get Menstrual cycle in May, or delay it til September. Might you leave an open May slot just in case it gets through FAR soon? Otherwise, we'll go for September. Bst, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 18:43, 23 April 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Buffalo Wings | |
From a guy in a suburb in Buffalo, New York and a wing fanatic, here's some wings for ya for the FA review award. Analyzing other people's work really gives you an idea of what is wrong or to watch out for when you write your own article. It's such a valuable experience! 👨x🐱 ( talk) 01:59, 26 April 2021 (UTC) |
Thanks HA, I shall enjoy. I agree, I wish that all wannabe FAC nominators would do half a dozen FAC reviews, 3 or 4 PRs and a couple of ACRs before their first nomination. It would probably make for a much less bruising experience. But c'est la vie. Gog the Mild ( talk) 09:12, 26 April 2021 (UTC)
Hello. The article 2020–21 SC East Bengal season was recently promoted to FA. Now, I want to go for FA. Will you be my mentor? Saha ❯❯❯ Stay safe 15:30, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 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
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
16:41, 29 April 2021 (UTC)
The second round of the 2021 WikiCup has now finished; it was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 61 points to advance to Round 3. There were some impressive efforts in the round, with the top eight contestants all scoring more than 400 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 110 good articles achieved in total by contestants, as well as the 216 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.
Our top scorers in Round 2 were:
Please remember that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of Round 2 but before the start of Round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in Round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (except for at the end of each round, when you must claim them before the cut-off date/time). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 10:27, 2 May 2021 (UTC)
Just nipping in and taking care of this one, the floor is yours again... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:59, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
The article
Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Lancaster's Normandy chevauchée of 1356 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Catlemur --
Catlemur (
talk)
14:21, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
|
Thanks so much for your comments on the FAC for Armenian Genocide denial. You really pushed me to improve the article! ( t · c) buidhe 21:09, 3 May 2021 (UTC) |
Hi buidhe and thank you. Especially for the reassurance. I was a little twitchy that I was just being nit picky a couple of times. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:10, 3 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, just to let you know I've tweaked one sentence in the blurb which didn't imo make sense. Regards, Amitchell125 ( talk) 18:15, 5 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I'm thinking of put the work into helping keep History of timekeeping devices as a FA, as it's a really interesting article imo. Question—when references have both ISBN and OCLC numbers, are both supposed to be there with FA s? (e.g. ISBN 0-7432-1676-8. OCLC 53324804) Amitchell125 ( talk) 14:36, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
It looks like the nominations listed at Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests that need source checks is a place that needs helping out. Are my source reviews of high-enough quality from what you've seen to be useable? Sourcing is the backbone of FA quality, and I'm nervous I'll be the one to break the entire FAC process by performing source reviews that don't cut it. Hog Farm Talk 17:38, 7 May 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 43, March – April 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:11, 10 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar |
For your consistently high-quality work. I don't know how you do it all! Eddie891 Talk Work 22:17, 11 May 2021 (UTC) |
Easy! I have stopped sleeping. Thank you, much appreciated. Gog the Mild ( talk) 22:19, 11 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi, I didn't know where to post this but regarding Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Image and source check requests, I believe Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/One of the Boys (1989 TV series)/archive1 has already undergone an image review by SNUGGUMS, unless I'm missing something. Heartfox ( talk) 22:15, 12 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Can we find a way for beaver to be off limits for April 7, 2022. I don't want people to keep nominating it and having to inform them that I already requested a certain day. LittleJerry ( talk) 18:12, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Treaty of Guînes 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
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
14:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, an editor seems to be hacking around with the lead section of Thomas Erpingham, which happens to be on the main page today. The editor has made 20 edits made in 3 hours, all minor, and has not discussed anything yet on the article's talk page—and I'm not convinced of the quality of the changes that have been made. This person seems to have begun contributing in January 2021, so lacks experience. Do know how I should best approach putting the lead back to how it was without getting into a war? Regards, Amitchell125 ( talk) 21:24, 17 May 2021 (UTC)
Editors of TFAs almost never watchlist the article and after 18 TFAs I have rarely had anyone come back to me on this, and then very politely. Also, I rarely read edits to "my" TFAs while they are on the main page, it is bad for my blood pressure. Does this help? Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:39, 17 May 2021 (UTC)Tidy up, changes and reverts to good faith edits around the recent TFA appearance per [[WP:FAOWN]]. If you think that an improvement to the article has been reverted, feel free to discuss it on the talk page.
![]() |
Thank you today for Battle of Rethymno, about a "very hard fought World War II battle which was part of the 1941 Battle of Crete. So hard fought that both sides lost."! - Perhaps you can help with a translation related to the conditions for peace coming growing whatever - on my talk, look for Wenn Menschen sich vergessen. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:12, 20 May 2021 (UTC)
See my talk today, - it's rare that a person is pictured when a dream comes true, and that the picture is shown on the Main page on a meaningful day. - Shoot for the stars in the same set, - a good match. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 10:21, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey Gog, will most likely finish up the source review on my FAC later today. Would you still like a couple more reviews in the meantime? I have an open opportunity for advertising at WT:VG, but I don't want to get people to waste time and energy if it's unecessary. Panini! 🥪 15:10, 21 May 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)
Hello. Help copy edit. Thank you. Vnosm ( talk) 12:32, 23 May 2021 (UTC)
I've spent 1/2 an hour trying to figure out how to do that conversion thingy and just cannot wrap my head around it. 25,000,000 Spanish pesetas in 1899 is the equivalent of what US $ now. All these converters keep asking me Euros, which confuses me because Euros didn't exist in 1899, but pesetas quit existing in 2002. I'm probably making this way harder than it needs to be, but it is beyond me to comprehend. You can try to explain it to me, but it would be easier if you could just put it in here: "In 1899, Germany purchased the Carolines for 25 million Spanish pesetas, equivalent to $?". I appreciate you. If you are too busy, no worries. SusunW ( talk) 18:45, 27 May 2021 (UTC)
The article
Treaty of Guînes you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Treaty of Guînes for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Sturmvogel 66 --
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk)
00:21, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Just asking because my idea of this seems a bit different from yours. For example, the Santería article is well prepared but hasn't got much substantive feedback. If it doesn't attract such in the near future, it's likely to be archived. So it does urgently need feedback, doesn't it? The Jamiroquai article I only put on the list because it was previously archived for lack of comment, but seemed well-prepared also. ( t · c) buidhe 17:37, 28 May 2021 (UTC)
Hey mate, long time no see. I've recently edited the Battle of Rethymno one of those edits was a unit conversation and one of them was a rewrite of a unit that was fully written per MOS:UNITNAMES. What's wrong with those edits or was it one of your FA clean-ups again? Cheers. CPA-5 ( talk) 14:13, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Weardale campaign 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
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
09:40, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Treaty of Lutatius, introduced: Regular reviewers of my articles from the First Punic War may well be pleased to hear that we have finally reached the end of the war. This article covers the peace treaty that ended the 27-year-long conflict. - I am sooo pleased to see something on a treaty, instead of another battle. First June flower. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:48, 1 June 2021 (UTC)
adding some impressions of places, flowers and music -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 20:36, 20 June 2021 (UTC)
Do you think I could nominated Shoot for the Stars, Aim for the Moon a little earlier than its two week period at FA? I am going to be working full time at a new job and will have to start getting ready to leave college soon. Meaning I will have to leave Wikipedia in July. You know I'm shooting for the stars, aiming for the moon 💫 ( talk) 08:26, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
Since York County, Maine, Tercentenary half dollar seems ready for promotion, would you mind if I went ahead with my next one, John McGraw?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 22:25, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
The article
Weardale campaign you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Weardale campaign for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
10:01, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 11 reviews between January and March 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
23:00, 5 June 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the May 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 30 points from 4 articles. Congratulations, Zawed ( talk) 09:47, 8 June 2021 (UTC) Talk 03:00, 4 May 2021 (UTC) |
... Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 7, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:07, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
... and Battle of Caen (1346) at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 26, 2021, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 14:19, 15 June 2021 (UTC)
Roman military belt buckles - just a thought... Girth Summit (blether) 21:33, 11 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi! As I'm sure you'll remember, you were invaluable in helping me get Mary van Kleeck over the finish line to FA status - thank you again, by the way. I'm now considering nominating Mary Jane Richardson Jones for FA status. I created the article on New Year's and Edwininlondon did a great GA review with me in May ( Talk:Mary Jane Richardson Jones/GA1).
Would you mind taking a quick look over the article and advising me of any major barriers/areas to work on before I nominate it? Edwin mentioned the reference organization in the GA review, and this is definitely something I want to improve on, so any advice in that area particularly would be great. Thank you! Ganesha811 ( talk) 03:22, 13 June 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gog!
Thank you for archiving my misfiled FAC. Is someone else going to move it or should I renominate but in FLC?
-- Neopeius ( talk) 13:03, 16 June 2021 (UTC)
What ho! If you have half an hour to spare perhaps you'd be kind enough to look in at the peer review for Arnold Bennett, which I'm considering taking to FAC if I return to that bandit country, now that, judging from my recent incursions, it is less bandit-infested than it was a little while ago. Tim riley talk 11:53, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog! I hope you are well. I was a little sad to see the Davis article was archived, but I completely understand that there wasn't a consensus for promotion. I will work on the article and make sure it does on the next occasion, however. :) In the close, you mentioned that neither nominator would be able to nominate any articles for two weeks. I do understand that those are the rules, but my other FAC closed a minute earlier; so I'd like to request the possibility of opening a slot for a single nomination of an FAC (not the same article). I am happy to wait out the 2 weeks for this single nomination, if that's deemed to be beneficial to the project.Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ( talk • contribs) 14:07, 25 June 2021 (UTC)
Guild of Copy Editors June 2021 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the June newsletter, our first newsletter of 2021, which is a brief update of Guild activities since December 2020. To unsubscribe, follow the link at the bottom of this box. Current events
Election time: Voting in our mid-year Election of Coordinators opened on 16 June and will conclude at the end of the month. GOCE coordinators normally serve a six-month term and are elected on an approval basis. Have your say and show support here. June Blitz: Our June copy-editing blitz is underway and will conclude on 26 June. Drive and blitz reports
January Drive: 28 editors completed 324 copy edits totalling 714,902 words. At the end of the drive, the backlog had reached a record low of 52 articles. ( full results) February Blitz: 15 editors completed 48 copy edits totalling 142,788 words. ( full results) March Drive: 29 editors completed 215 copy edits totalling 407,736 words. ( full results) April Blitz: 12 editors completed 23 copy edits totalling 56,574 words. ( full results) May Drive: 29 editors completed 356 copy edits totalling 479,013 words. ( full results) Other news
Progress report: as of 26 June, GOCE participants had completed 343 Requests since 1 January. The backlog has fluctuated but remained in control, with a low of 52 tagged articles at the end of January and a high of 620 articles in mid-June. Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Miniapolis, Tenryuu and Twofingered Typist, and from member Reidgreg. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors at 12:37, 26 June 2021 (UTC).
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)
So I've recently decided on an ambitious project. Not sure how the scope would work. If I did Missouri in the American Civil War, would I need to tack on things such as Palmyra massacre and the Sacking of Osceola or the Camp Jackson affair, as well as all the campaigns. Or would it just be best to create List of American Civil War battles in Missouri, which would be hard to scope because there were over 1,000 when you count the skirmishes. Or do you think I could just get away with the lazy route and just do the overall article and the battles? Note: I'm not expecting this to be a quick process. Hog Farm Talk 00:00, 28 June 2021 (UTC)
Hey there Gog. I'm currently co-nominator for the nomination of Martin Rundkvist. Knock on wood, it's going well—three supports, addressed comments from a recently added fourth review, and now just missing an image review. Would you mind if I got a head start on a second nomination? -- Usernameunique ( talk) 05:10, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
I assume that you are wanting to nominate another collaboration? Any editor is allowed both a sole nominator nom and a collaboration nom without special permission. Gog the Mild ( talk) 11:37, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
Good article nominations | July 2021 Backlog Drive | ![]() |
July 2021 Backlog Drive:
| |
Other ways to participate: | |
You're receiving this message because you have conducted 10+ good article reviews or participated in the March backlog drive.
Click here to opt out of any future messages. |
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 22:31, 29 June 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you The Writer's Barnstar for taking second place in the June 2021 MILHIST writing contest, scoring 20 points from two articles. Zawed ( talk) 03:43, 1 July 2021 (UTC) |
The third round of the 2021 WikiCup has now come to an end. Each of the sixteen contestants who made it into the fourth round had at least 294 points, and our top six scorers all had over 600 points. They were:
In round three, contestants achieved 19 featured articles, 7 featured lists, 106 featured article reviews, 72 good articles, 1 good topic, 62 good article reviews, 165 DYKs and 96 ITN items. We enter the fourth round with scores reset to zero; any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them (one contestant in round 3 lost out because of this). When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Judges: Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Cwmhiraeth Cwmhiraeth ( talk) MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 09:29, 2 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 10 reviews between April and June 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
00:35, 3 July 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
War against Nabis was recently delisted at FAR for poor sourcing, but it is still rated A-Class for MILHIST. I'm considering taking this to ACR again for improvement or delisting, because it is heavily sourced to Livy and Smith's 1873 source that has not aged well, but thought it worthwhile to get a second opinion on this first.
Also, for the continuing URFA/2020 project (I'm afraid the delisting of many older FAs is gonna start irking people soon), Alcibiades is one of the oldest ones on the table, and was noticed for potentially needing FAR back in March due to heavy use of Smith 1873, Thucydides, Xenophon, and Plutarch in places. Due to caps on FAR nominations, I've only been able to make one FAR nomination over the last month, so I want to save mine for the most problematic ones. In your opinion, does the sourcing in Alcibiades warrant FAR? Hog Farm Talk 02:17, 5 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you today for First Punic War, introduced "As a finale to my series of articles on the First Punic War, I offer you the article on the War itself. 23 years of war boiled down to less than 6,000 words – so there is a discussion point right there."! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:05, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
Thank you for the scheduling of August. I wonder why some bios have birth and death days and months that are not relevant to the specific day, but especially about 23 August, where it says 5 August. Could that one perhaps be moved? -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:00, 17 July 2021 (UTC)
Congratulations, Gog, on all the detailed work you have devoted to this article and to many of the related articles it links to. From time to time, the FA on the main page really attracts my attention, as this one did today. It's thanks to editors like you that Wikipedia is gaining increasing respect as a reliable and readable source of information. I look forward to further GAs and FAs in relation to ancient history. I'm afraid I can't offer much assistance but I enjoy reading up on these important events.-- Ipigott ( talk) 10:50, 7 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Treaty of Guînes. — Bilorv ( talk) 20:45, 12 July 2021 (UTC) |
Cheers, Bilorv, thanks for that. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:20, 12 July 2021 (UTC)
Because I know you are dying to know, I have done 85 of 195. Why does it feel as if I am not making progress? Still swimming in so much to do with very little light at the end of this tunnel. Mayhaps when I hit 1/2 it will feel different. That being said, I am certainly learning a lot. SusunW ( talk) 19:27, 14 July 2021 (UTC)
Hey, there's only one thing pending with the source review, and I believe it's been addressed for sometime now. Sturm isn't being super commutative, and the SR seems to have greatly stalled the whole process. I'm wondering if perhaps promotion might be called for at this point...? Sorry if I come off as presumptuous. Aza24 ( talk) 21:56, 15 July 2021 (UTC)
This week's articles for improvement are:
– Emley Moor transmitting station –
– Bleaklow –
– Spectacles –
:P Girth Summit (blether) 09:04, 18 July 2021 (UTC)
Hello, a few months ago, I began work on promoting my article SS Choctaw to FA. The project eventually stalled, as I have been quite busy in real life. I would like to work on it again, and was wondering if you would be willing to help me with it.
Just so I understand the rules for the future: I am quite impressed with the article, and think it should become Featured once a question I had about the drawings was addressed. Is there anything I could/should have said to make you not close the nomination? — Kusma ( talk) 09:57, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Burnt Candlemas 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
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
16:41, 19 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Burnt Candlemas 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:Burnt Candlemas for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
00:21, 22 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Burnt Candlemas you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Burnt Candlemas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Hog Farm --
Hog Farm (
talk)
17:42, 24 July 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Battle of Caen (1346), another "article on the Hundred Years' War. At least it is not about Gascony. This features the much-vaunted English army of Crécy a little earlier in the campaign. Completely out of control both before and after they stumble to victory in their assault on Caen. A stain on England's record which neither discomfited them nor persuaded the French to battle."! - some recent July images to thank you -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:41, 26 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Halidon Hill 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
Tayi Arajakate --
Tayi Arajakate (
talk)
20:40, 27 July 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Halidon Hill you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Halidon Hill for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Tayi Arajakate --
Tayi Arajakate (
talk)
08:21, 29 July 2021 (UTC)
Books & Bytes
Issue 45, May – June 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:04, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
12:30, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Have nommed Cullen House at FAC, if you are stuck for something to review. Be gentle... Girth Summit (blether) 14:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)
Hi, Gog, I was collating last month's FAC data and noticed this comment of yours. I know the image/source review requests are reserved for FACs that are getting close to support, but I didn't think the urgents list had that restriction. I'm pretty sure that in the past it's been used for anything that needs more reviews and is starting to age. Has anything changed, or am I misremembering? Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 21:46, 2 August 2021 (UTC)
Hey there, Gog the Mild! I wanted to quickly thank you for all of your work coordinating the featured article candidates. Hope you enjoyed your vacation! KyleJoan talk 17:11, 3 August 2021 (UTC)
I appreciate your support and trust in my recent run for admin. I've had an interesting first few weeks and am learning a lot by being able to better watch (through tools) what admins do. Please call on me if you see making an error, or if you just need help. Thanks again. BusterD ( talk) 18:01, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Would you mind having another look at Donough MacCarty, 1st Earl of Clancarty? Hawkeye7 (discuss) 21:31, 4 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, hope you are well! Quick question: with the current state of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/1986–87 Gillingham F.C. season/archive1, am I permitted to nominate another article? All the best, ChrisTheDude ( talk) 17:04, 7 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons, for placing first in the July 2021 Military History Article Writing Contest, achieving 55 points from 6 articles. Congratulations, Hog Farm Talk 18:03, 8 August 2021 (UTC) |
Speedy as ever. Thanks Hog Farm. Gog the Mild ( talk) 18:04, 8 August 2021 (UTC)
On 10 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Burnt Candlemas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an English army devastated Lothian in Scotland so thoroughly in 1356 that the episode became known as Burnt Candlemas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Burnt Candlemas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Burnt Candlemas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 10 August 2021 (UTC)
All is still still at McGraw. I hope there is no objection to my nominating another article?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 11:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
On 12 August 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Oroscopa, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when surrounded at the Battle of Oroscopa Carthaginian troops killed their horses and burnt their wooden shields to cook them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Oroscopa. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Battle of Oroscopa), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 12:03, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hello Gog the Mild, apologies for the random message. I just wanted to say thank you for promoting Lights Up to FA. This would be my very first FA, and I'm happy that this got promoted after one previously unsuccessful FAC. I hope you have a great day. -- Viridian Bovary ( talk) 14:24, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
He asked me directly, removing my earlier doubts re collaboration. He may be sorry that he did, I hope not. SusunW ( talk) 18:25, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi! While I've lurked Wikipedia for years I've only been actively editing it for a few months. However, I've often seen your name pop up in contests, talk pages of articles I've read, or in WikiProject pages and thought you'd be a good person to come to for advice. I'm currently working on improving the article on the First Carlist War to reach the quality it truly deserves as one of the most important conflicts in Spanish history. I'm going to be working on it for the next few weeks but I was wondering if you could give me some advice based on my work so far, which you can see in my sandbox and includes the Background and Basque Fueros sections. One particular concern I have is respecting the structure of the original article, which I disagree with (for example, I feel the division between north and south fronts rather than a chronological and more holistic view of the conflict's progress is bad as it makes them appear as two different theaters rather than different areas of operations). How should I deal with that without creating animosity from other people that contributed to the article? I would also greatly appreciate any other comments on the work I have done so far. Warm regards -- A. C. Santacruz ( talk) 20:40, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Thanks for the input! I'll definitely take it into account, and see where you're coming from. Thanks for the advice :D A. C. Santacruz ( talk) 22:19, 12 August 2021 (UTC)
Was this edit intentional? It appears to have been done using the "rollback vandalism" option. Stuff like that happens to me accidentally all the time (I've had to essentially disable rollback on mobile editing because of my fat fingers). Hog Farm Talk 01:23, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the above article has been scheduled as today's featured article for September 16, 2021. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 16, 2021. Congratulations on your work!— Wehwalt ( talk) 13:35, 13 August 2021 (UTC)
It's looking like I'm going to have a lengthier review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/James Longstreet/archive1. I've quoted a source in a few spots - is it appropriate to quote the source directly on the FAC page, or should I move it to the FAC talk page? Hog Farm Talk 04:47, 17 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, if you have to withdraw Aliens due to lack of activity can I have permission to list Ghostbusters within the 2 week period? It might not be good to go within the 2 weeks, I'm thinking just in case since if Aliens drops out, I could maybe get GB1 and GB2 to FAC before the third film comes out. Thanks. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 16:20, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
The article
English invasion of Scotland (1650) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:English invasion of Scotland (1650) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility.
Tayi Arajakate
Talk
17:44, 19 August 2021 (UTC)
I was checking on User:Dying's edits, made another edit, then reverted myself ... the issue seemed clear at first (didn't want to repeat "lead ship ... class ... lead ship ... class" right from the start), but now it's clear as mud so I better back off. The article on the class uses "was" for the class (reasonably enough), but the TFA article uses "is". Some people feel strongly about these things (or used to, maybe not now). One option I think would be to avoid tense altogether by starting off the second sentence "The last lead ship of any class of United States battleships, ...". Thoughts? - Dank ( push to talk) 00:40, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Crécy campaign, well timed with a battle of it OTD, and introduced: "An invading English army landed in Normandy in July 1346. During the next seven weeks it burnt and looted its way across France, coming within 2 miles of the walls of Paris. Every time it met French forces it defeated them, including at the battle of Crecy. It halted at Calais, which the English besieged and starved into submission over 11 months."! - Also OTD, pictured: Sigmund Jähn, first German in space, whose article we expanded when died. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:52, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hamilcar's victory with Naravas 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
10:41, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
You went a bit far there with the source removal - some of them were still being used in the text I retained from the previous version. I was going to revert and then selectively remove, but thought you might still be working on it and didn't want to cause an edit conflict. Let me know if I'm free to reinstate. Girth Summit (blether) 19:49, 26 August 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
15:48, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Been discussing User:Dying's edits on this one on their talk page ... I think we can reduce the chances of problems at WP:ERRORS if I tweak this one to be closer to the current version of the article lead. Objections? - Dank ( push to talk) 19:38, 28 August 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) 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
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
05:20, 30 August 2021 (UTC)
I was eager to get that FA done, and I appreciate your help getting it wrapped up in time for the anniversary, and helping manage the date request at TFA. If you need another FA review or similar, just ping me on my talk page. Happy to reciprocate. Shooterwalker ( talk) 03:18, 31 August 2021 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:58, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hamilcar's victory with Naravas you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Hamilcar's victory with Naravas for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
16:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Oroscopa 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
19:22, 1 September 2021 (UTC)
The fourth round of the competition has finished with over 500 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants,
The Rambling Man and
Epicgenius, each scoring over 3000 points, and six contestants scoring over 1000. All but one of the finalists achieved one or more FAs during the round, the exception being
Bloom6132 who demonstrated that 61 "in the news" items produces an impressive number of points. Other contestants who made it to the final are
Gog the Mild,
Lee Vilenski,
BennyOnTheLoose,
Amakuru and
Hog Farm. However, all their points are now swept away and everyone starts afresh in the final round.
Round 4 saw the achievement of 18 featured articles and 157 good articles.
Bilorv scored for a 25-article good topic on
Black Mirror but narrowly missed out on qualifying for the final round. There was enthusiasm for FARs, with 89 being performed, and there were 63 GARs and around 100 DYKs during the round. As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it to the final round; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. For other contestants, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them.
If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 13:01, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Guines (1352) 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
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
15:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Guines (1352) 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:Siege of Guines (1352) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
20:21, 2 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Guines (1352) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Siege of Guines (1352) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Harrias --
Harrias (
talk)
13:02, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
@ Amakuru, BennyOnTheLoose, Bloom6132, Epicgenius, Hog Farm, Lee Vilenski, and The Rambling Man: I am aware that several of you have asked FAC coordinator permission to nominate a second article. And have seen that I am editing and wondered why I am ignoring the requests. This is because Cwmhiraeth has asked me to "leave that sort of decision to the other coordinators during the rest of the WikiCup". I am finding this a little frustrating, and imagine that you find it more so, but as a current WikiCup participant myself I am in a difficult position and you are going to have to wait on Ian - which after all only puts you in the same position as me. I have also been asked to avoid promoting any FAcs by the seven of you for the duration. I can see that there may be the appearance of a conflict of interest in both of these areas and so am complying for now. I am afraid that this may mean that FAC is likely to be a little clunky for us eight until the WikiCup finishes. Gog the Mild ( talk) 21:50, 3 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
For finishing first in the August 2021 WikiProject Military history writer's contest, scoring 43 points from 4 articles. Hog Farm Talk 06:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC) |
Hog Farm Talk 06:30, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Battle of Kinghorn 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
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
13:01, 4 September 2021 (UTC)
On 5 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article English invasion of Scotland (1650), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Thomas Fairfax, Lord General of the New Model Army, resigned his commission rather than invade Scotland in 1650? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/English invasion of Scotland (1650). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, English invasion of Scotland (1650)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
I don't know who to ping. I don't understand how I can do any more to prove that a work painted in 1808 is in the public domain, then to link it to a page saying it is in the public domain. Which is what I did. Serendi pod ous 16:03, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
Appreciate all the help. I don't know the first thing about image curation. I think Nikkimaria assumed I did. Serendi pod ous 18:35, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Kinghorn 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:Battle of Kinghorn for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
20:01, 5 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Original Barnstar |
Gog, thanks for all your advice, mentorship, and hand holding over the years. I've greatly enjoyed all of your top-notch work that I've gotten a chance to review and really appreciated your help of me (and other editors). It means a lot and really makes a difference; I finally got an article through FAC without needing your reviewing-- that's a pretty big milestone in my book :) Who knows, I might even try to do it again. Keep up the great work! Eddie891 Talk Work 02:25, 6 September 2021 (UTC) |
Hi Eddie, that is very generous of you. And your praise is making me blush. No need for you to be over modest, you class as an old hand at FAC now. When I was closing your latest offering I just thought "Ah, another from Eddie, they know what they're doing. I need to go through the motions, but I'm sure it'll be fine." And it was. I look forward to your fifth nomination, what do you have in mind? Gog the Mild ( talk) 09:56, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Kinghorn you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Kinghorn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
The Rambling Man --
The Rambling Man (
talk)
07:21, 6 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Battle of Oroscopa you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Battle of Oroscopa for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
17:41, 8 September 2021 (UTC)
So User:Hog Farm/Black Terror (ship) just needs me to flesh out the lead before it would be ready to publish. I was hoping for GA or A-class until I turned up the Smith source, but the one ship/two ships conflict between sources will obviously need to be better addressed for even B-class. I would guess with your work in ancient warfare that you've run into similar unreconcilable conflicts between RS accounts. Can you think of a better way to weave these together? I suspect the Smith source may be right, but the majority run with the other approach. Hog Farm Talk 00:21, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
This is to let you know that the Battle of Bergerac article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 13, 2021... Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:41, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
It's been 5 days without a comment. The majority now support. Can we close as promote? Serendi pod ous 00:26, 11 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:39, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Second Battle of Cape Finisterre (1747) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Nick-D --
Nick-D (
talk)
09:01, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Siege of Breteuil 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
20:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you today for Roman withdrawal from Africa (255 BC), introduced (as a battle): "When I nominated Battle of the Aegates I wrote "the third and final installment of my trio of naval battles from the First Punic War". I was wrong. Missing was this, the Carthaginian's worst naval defeat of the 23-year-long war; which was swiftly followed by the Roman's worst disaster of the war - a storm sank most of their fleet, killing over 100,000."! - I have a former machinery hall on the same page, which became a venue for Beethoven's Fidelio. I took pics, but it came without, - two on my talk. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:23, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
Today: a woman in red, two who died under "in memoriam" and LouisAlain missed - my first editnotice read: "Every editor is a human being" which is quoted from a comment by Geometry guy in a 2012 discussion on WP:AN. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:35, 27 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Siege of Breteuil you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Siege of Breteuil for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
08:41, 16 September 2021 (UTC)
On 18 September 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hamilcar's victory with Naravas, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that an army commanded by Hannibal's father was saved from defeat when part of the enemy force deserted and fought alongside him? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hamilcar's victory with Naravas. You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Hamilcar's victory with Naravas), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
— Amakuru ( talk) 00:03, 18 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) 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
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
04:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
20:01, 19 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) 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:Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
03:21, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Sieges of Berwick (1355 and 1356) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
14:01, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
The article
Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Hundred Years' War (1345–1347) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Djmaschek --
Djmaschek (
talk)
15:41, 20 September 2021 (UTC)
This is just to let you know that the Wikimedia ZA AGM will be taking place on 25 September 2021 See below for more details.
Books & Bytes
Issue 46, July – August 2021
Sent by MediaWiki message delivery on behalf of The Wikipedia Library team -- 11:14, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk)
13:59, 22 September 2021 (UTC)
I am officially 1/2 way through Africa!!!★★¡¡¡ I think I can get one more in before the month ends and then I am rewarding myself in October to do a woman for Women in Green's October editathon, before I get back to the slog. Have you given thought to my proposal? Bad idea? Good idea? Just meh? SusunW ( talk) 13:54, 23 September 2021 (UTC)
Worcestershire - one of England's oldest and still existing (with some minor boundary changes) ceremonial and political shires, famous for its nearly 1000 year old cathedral, the River Severn, the
AONB of the
Malvern Hills, some of the oldest schools in the country, England's fastest growing university, apples, pears, cider and cricket, and of course its world famous
sauce. The Wikiproject is now in need of some attention. Created 12 years ago, this project amassed a huge resource for editors working on all kinds of articles and categories related in some way or another to the county.
Kudpung is more or less retired from Wikipedia getting on for 2 years ago and it would be good if a group of editors could get it up to date and continue to maintain it.
Opt out of this message list
here.
WikiProject Worcestershire 14:14, 24 September 2021 (UTC)
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:32, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog,
Double Sharp and I believe Ceres (dwarf planet) should be moved to its formal name, 1 Ceres, parallel to e.g. 50000 Quaoar. However, we don't want to destabilize the article during FAC. On the other hand, I don't want to wait and then have the argument that it must stay at its current name because that's what it passed FAC under. Any advice? Could the title maybe be part of the FAC? — kwami ( talk) 03:35, 26 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
The Coordinator stars | |
On behalf of the members of WikiProject Military history, in recognition of your election to the position of Coordinator, I take great pleasure in presenting you with the Coordinator's stars, and wish you the best of luck for the coming year! Hog Farm Talk 03:21, 30 September 2021 (UTC) |
Guild of Copy Editors September 2021 Newsletter
![]() Hello and welcome to the September GOCE newsletter, a brief update of Guild activities since June 2021. Current and upcoming events
September Drive: Our current backlog-elimination drive is open until 23:59 on 30 September (UTC) and is open to all copy editors. Sign up today! Drive and Blitz reports
June Blitz: From 20 to 26 June, 6 participating editors claimed 16 copy edits, focusing on requests and articles tagged in March and April. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. July Drive: Almost 575,000 words of articles were copy edited for this event. Of the 24 people who signed up, 18 copyedited at least one article. Final results and awards are listed here. August Blitz: From 15 to 21 August, we copy edited articles tagged in April and May 2021 and requests. 9 participating editors completed 17 copy edits on the blitz. Final results, including barnstars awarded, are available here. Other news
June election: Jonesey95 was chosen to continue as lead coordinator, assisted by Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. New maintenance template added to our project scope: After a short discussion in June, we added {{ cleanup tense}} to the list of maintenance templates that adds articles to the Guild's copy editing backlog categories. This change added 198 articles, spread over 97 months of backlog, to our queue. We processed all of those articles except for those from the three or four most recent months during the July backlog elimination drive (Here's a link to a "tense" discussion during the drive). Progress report: As of 18:26, 24 September 2021 (UTC), GOCE copyeditors have processed 468 requests since 1 January and there were 60 requests awaiting completion on the Requests page. The backlog of articles tagged for copy-editing stood at 433 (see monthly progress graph above). Thank you all again for your participation; we wouldn't be able to achieve what we have without you! Cheers from your GOCE coordinators Jonesey95, Dhtwiki, Tenryuu, and Miniapolis. To discontinue receiving GOCE newsletters, please remove your name from
our mailing list.
|
MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:44, 30 September 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) | |
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the The Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) for participating in 13 reviews between July and September 2021.
Peacemaker67 (
talk) via
MilHistBot (
talk)
03:46, 2 October 2021 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Truce of Calais 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
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
04:01, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
The article
Truce of Calais you nominated as a
good article has passed ; see
Talk:Truce of Calais for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can
nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Iazyges --
Iazyges (
talk)
18:21, 5 October 2021 (UTC)
Hello, Gog the Mild. This is a bot-delivered message letting you know that
Draft:Battle of Galatas, a page you created, has not been edited in at least 5 months. Drafts that have not been edited for six months
may be deleted, so if you wish to retain the page, please
edit it again or
request that it be moved to your userspace.
If the page has already been deleted, you can request it be undeleted so you can continue working on it.
Thank you for your submission to Wikipedia. FireflyBot ( talk) 11:24, 8 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() |
Thank you, and all who helped, today for Battle of Bergerac, introduced: "The first nine years of the Hundred Years' War had created an expensive stalemate on all fronts. Then the Earl of Derby arrived in Gascony with a small force. Within three weeks he had smashed the French force assembling at Bergerac and captured the town, marking the start of sixteen months of spectacular success."! - Defeated on AN, but with two Recent death articles on the same page, Mordechai Geldman and Evelyn Richter, and in waiting, Luis de Pablo, - sad but rewarding to remember them. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:33, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Today: see yourself, read about a hymn praying to not be on earth in vain, about a comics artist whose characters have character (another collaboration of the "perennial gang", broken by one of us banned), and in memory of the last prima donna assoluta, Edita Gruberová. I had to go to two grave sites last week, one who died now, one who died 10 years ago, so standing upright and in black seems appropriate. More colours - but subdued - can be had on hikes, - updated. -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:51, 20 October 2021 (UTC)
Today: memories in friendship -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 13:55, 28 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I really enjoyed reading this. Nice job! auntieruth (talk) 14:58, 13 October 2021 (UTC)
Hi Gog, I assume you haven't scheduled Carillon for TFA as you voted in the nomination and therefore cannot/should not? Thrakkx ( talk) 18:25, 16 October 2021 (UTC)
On 17 October 2021, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Hundred Years' War (1345–1347), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in 1345 and 1346 the English repeatedly defeated the French in both north and south-west France? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hundred Years' War (1345–1347). You are welcome to check how many pageviews the nominated article or articles got while on the front page ( here's how, Hundred Years' War (1345–1347)), and if they received a combined total of at least 416.7 views per hour (i.e., 5,000 views in 12 hours or 10,000 in 24), the hook may be added to the statistics page. 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.
Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 00:02, 17 October 2021 (UTC)
![]() | 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. |