We now have three supports at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Horse Protection Act of 1970/archive1. I think that means it's time for a FAC delegate to take a peek and close/promote? Just FYI. Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 21:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Pony!
Congratulations! For promoting
Oxbow (horse) to FA, you have received a
pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend!
Montanabw
(talk)
22:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors,
click here.
![]() | On 2 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit staff were responsible for translating training material from French into English prior to delivery of the Dassault Mirage III to the RAAF? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 16:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history service award | |
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's June 2013 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Anotherclown ( talk) 12:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Ian, I've archived this after an email request from Drmies. Is there anything else that needs to be done beyond adding the template and removing it from the main FAC page? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. I have an FAC delegate query I wanted to run past you, if that is okay? Alan McNicoll has been at FAC for a month and a half now and, despite two supports and no outstanding issues or comments, has not attracted attention of any kind since its last review (by you, that is) on 12 June. Considering the review is so close to gaining the required support, yet edging closer and closer to potential closure due to the time it has been open, I am of course anxious to try and get a few editors to have a look and possibly review the article. I was thinking of leaving a note on the talk pages of the editors who reviewed the article for A-Class to see if they would be interested in having a look. However, I wasn't sure if such a thing was okay or a giant no-no, so wanted to run it by you first. Other than that, I'm not sure what I can do. I have already posted a note to Milhist, but that didn't work unfortunately. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 03:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. Sorry to be a pain again. Crisco has kindly reviewed the article and, during the process, completed an image check. As is always the case, the post-1945 images have been questioned. As someone who has kept abreast of the image debates over the last couple of years and is thus likely to know where to point to, I was wondering if you'd mind popping over and having a look? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 05:20, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've started an RFC on proposed adjustments to the governance of the featured-article forums. Tony (talk) 11:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
My Garden Warbler has three supports, no opposes or outstanding issues, is it premature to throw Pacific Swift to the wolves? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the concrete bunker housing RAAF North-Eastern Area Command's operational headquarters during World War II was topped with a suburban house to mislead enemy aircraft? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
per #Ping! above, Oxbow (horse) appears to be ready for your review and potential promotion to FA at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Oxbow (horse)/archive1 when it arrives in the proper spot in your work queue. Thanks Montanabw (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian, I requested a source check on the talk page of Wikipedia Featured Artcle Candidates. But, no one has yet reviewed the sources. Would you pls, ask an experienced source reviewer to review it. Thanks.— Prashant 03:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I see 5 articles were promoted today, but not Drowning Girl FAC, which has 3 supports, an image check and a source check in its 30 day under review. What gives? Can I nominate Whaam! now? I am working towards a 9/28 50th anniversary for that work and would like to get the FAC started.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Since you are a participant at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Whaam!, I am informing you that Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1 is now open.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 21:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I noticed this edit. It was curious, but it seemed like you were going to award the FOUR. However, you have made no edits since. What is going on? Also, why did you close Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Whaam! yesterday? Is there a policy against an article being at FAC and MILHIST A-Class?-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 12:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Hasn't gotten its bright shiny star... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Bot does seem very slow of late.. Tibetan Prayer ᧾ 19:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I'm very pleased to present you with this medal in recognition of your work in developing the No. 84 Wing RAAF, Lockheed C-130 Hercules in Australian service, and William Hely articles to A-class standard - thanks also for writing the sections of the C-130 article which reviewers didn't complain about in the FAC! Nick-D ( talk) 08:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC) |
Just so you know at FAC I'm the artist formerly known as Dr. Blofeld. Am editing under this account at least for the near future. Tibetan Prayer ᧾ 19:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Gday Ian. Just letting you know I've added the review here: Talk:North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF)/GA1. When you get a chance pls have a look at my comments. Apologies for the delay I was called out of town for a while. Anotherclown ( talk) 19:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Interstate 496 received a spotcheck at its ACR, like all newly promoted articles coming out of the Highway/USRD projects. Imzadi 1979 → 05:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your advice with regards to the 2012 tour of She Has a Name FAC; it was good to see the article go up on the main page. I have had another FAC up for just under a month now and, while there has been a fair bit of discussion and I believe that all actionable objections have been resolved, only two editors have given their explicit support for the promotion. Of the seven editors who have contributed to the discussion, two have supported, one has decided to abstain, and four have no outstanding concerns but have neither supported nor declined. Of those remaining four, I know that at least one has simply been away from Wikipedia since their initial comments. Is the current level of support sufficient? If not, would you recommend that I contact the editors who have already commented to request that they make their stance explicit, or should I simply encourage more editors to contribute to the discussion? Any advice you are willing to provide would be greatly appreciated.
Neelix ( talk) 18:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I just recieved an odd looking email from your account with nothing but some odd text and a link to a URL - I fear that your account may have been hacked. If so, I hope the damage isn't too bad. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Ugh. So now we know the email addys of the entire Wiki :) Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
hello Ian. Why did you revert my edits in this article? The whole album is classified as glam in the articles about the songs so why not this one. And have you ever heard Panic in Detroit? It's maybe the most typical glam rock song on the album. Just listen to it. And almost all the songs of Bowie from 1971 to 1974 is called glam in their articles. Far from all of them really is typical for this genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.157.72.4 ( talk) 12:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Ian, are you sure that the Uruguayan War FAC nomination was closed correctly? It has been almost ten days and the bot hasn't archived it. -- Lecen ( talk) 19:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I won't be available from August 16 to September 16. I will be traveling around north India and the foothills of the Himalayas. I hope you're not planning to be away at the same time. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ( talk) 20:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
I should like to ask a couple of favors from you. I would like you to look at the above and recommend any changes/improvements for its betterment. If you should happen to assess it as a "B" level article at the same time, my feelings wouldn't be hurt.
Many thanks, Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:42, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Wow and gazow! Way beyond expectations...many thanks.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 15:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Could you please respond to my request here? Thank you. -- William S. Saturn ( talk) 06:34, 25 July 2013 (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)
15:13, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Apologies for my breach of etiquette at the Alkan FA page, and thanks for your assurance.-- Smerus ( talk) 08:36, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, just curious, is this soon to be promoted? -- JDC808 ♫ 03:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
Spot of trouble here. I want to submit Werner Voss for A-Class review. I followed the assessment instructions and posted the template on the Talk page as "A-Class=current" and waited for the magic "currently undergoing" popup to appear...which it didn't. After chuntering about through the various help links and not finding a solution, I have turned to the Aussie godfather of WP aviation for help.
Can you show me what I did wrong in this process? I should like to learn it, as I have some more articles I would like to promote.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I rummaged through everything, in edit view and in plain view, before messaging you, searching for that key to the nomination page. Now another editor has been editing the banners, so I looked again. Still no luck. This A-Class nomination process is such a pain in the ass I think I will give up the effort.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 14:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I hope I'm not stepping on any toes, but Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tales of Graces/archive1 was withdrawn by the nominator a few days ago, so I removed and archived it. Back in the day (which was a Tuesday, by the way) before I was a delegate, I and a couple others used to do these maintenance tasks occasionally to help out Sandy. -- Laser brain (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Djaoeh Dimata/archive1 looks to be essentially done. Could I nominate something before it is promoted? Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang shouldn't be too much of a burden on the queue. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
FYI, I will agree to a WP:CONSENSUS determined at an RFC after User:Rjanag gets back to me with some statistics on the project. I understand that it will take at least a week after he creates the new category to have the data. I am drafting the RFC here. You can follow along.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 08:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article Candidate reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, Ian, I'm so glad to see you updating FAS! But there's an error somewhere: [1] I don't have time to track it down ... perhaps a removal, perhaps an error at WP:FA, or perhaps a missing promotion (was it 36 or 37?) Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
OK, that was it, it is sorted now ... have other redirects been put in archives? That shouldn't be happening ... getting name changes right at FAC is a challenge, and Gimme set up articlehistory so that it could handle name changes and this wouldn't happen, but nominators mess it up. If there are other redirects in archives, then archives will be wrong ... I 'spose I shouldn't worry any more about this, but we always kept very clean records ... :/ ... So, that FAC hasn't been botified, but then most aren't any more anyway ... so ... SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day Ian, something needs doing on the talk page, as it is not showing as FA. Bot should have run by now, surely... I'm marking it as checked in the July contest, but you might want to follow up. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:52, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Would you be able to explain why, as part of your recent edit to the above article, you appear to have reverted my edit? My change was within policy and justified, so I can see no valid reason for its reversion. I assume that this was a simple mistake, but in so doing, you reverted the sentence in question to a version which does not make grammatical sense. I would be glad if you could correct your error, or let me know that I can do so without further reversion. Thanks. 188.220.73.163 ( talk) 17:40, 7 August 2013 (UTC) (aka. Adrian M.H.)
G'day Ian, I'm wondering if we need to chat with the Article Alerts bot guys about the A-Class results, some of those articles should have shown up in the bot run last evening (Australian time), but didn't. Do you think that might be the problem? Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 23:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I still have a few concerns, which I have raised at the FAC a few moments ago. Graham Colm ( talk) 05:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Meh, i was still typing at the FAC for Takhiagiin_Elbegdorj.
But no worries, just copied it to talk - see
Talk:Tsakhiagiin_Elbegdorj (agree with your close).
GermanJoe (
talk)
08:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
As Stone Mountain Memorial half dollar seems in good shape, is there objection to my moving ahead and nominating Eisenhower dollar?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Just thought I'd let you know that Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/S&M (song)/archive10 has 7 supports and 0 opposes. All media and source checks have been done and dusted. — ₳ aron 18:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian! Can you revise the nomination please? Thank you. — Tomíca (T2ME) 10:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
You should probably mention the 4000th FA milestone at WP:POST, WT:FA and WT:FAC.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 16:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Hamiltonstone responded to your comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Parity of zero/archive2; I'm not sure you saw. ceran thor 22:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Sire, Your smallest wish is my command! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi, this is a note to inform you that a page in which you have previously shown interest, WP:FOUR, has been nominated for deletion. Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by your comments on the Jesus FAC. One of the FA criteria is neutrality, and the objections I raised were primarily aimed at neutrality. They are normal objections (within a non-normal subject), and actionable in the usual way. Sources that aren't predisposed to one side can be supplemented or replaced with more neutral sources. More balanced representation of the various views can be added. Some of my objections had to do with flat out misrepresentation of sources. If that's not actionable, Wikipedia should shut down right now. It's not helpful (for example, doesn't help me improve future FAC contributions) to just dismiss objections as "not actionable." Strangesad ( talk) 04:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian Rose, I'm the main author/nominator of Stanley Bruce and this is my first time nominating something for FA status. I'm a bit lost on the nomination process because a lot of articles nominated after me have a lot more reviews/consensus being built but mine seems relatively untouched, though I've been diligent as I can fixing identified problems. I've realized now there is no set work order for the nominations and people review as they please, so does that mean I should be soliciting reviews from senior/knowledgeable types from around Wikipedia? I'm just worried my nomination will lapse for lack of consensus, which would be a shame after all the work I've put in. Unus Multorum ( talk) 07:41, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, I'm thinking of taking 15th Battalion (Australia) to A-class review. Before I do, though, I'd like someone who isn't so close to the topic to take a look. Would you mind taking a look and letting me know if it all makes sense? Any tweaks would be most welcome, too, of course. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 00:42, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
It hasn't been archived and the history hasn't been updated. Nominations promoted after this was promoted have already had the gold star put on the article. — ₳ aron 16:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
In case you missed it. GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 19:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
Upon rereading the leadup to Voss being nominated for A Class review, I realize that I may seemed somewhat churlish in my comments concerning you. When I bemoaned the lack of aid from you, it was more in the sense of, "If Ian can't help me, then I am beyond help," rather than, "Ian has given up on me." If I gave the impression I felt shunned by you, I apologize profusely. Such was not my intent. Certainly, over the years, you have given me more aid than any other WP editor or administrator. For that, I am thankful.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on William Hely. TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:44, 20 August 2013 (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)
23:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, could you please archive the candidancy for that article? I don't think it will pass for now and i need to get a peer review to do some C/E. thanks a lot - Eli + 10:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :) - Eli + 12:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I should say "I'm sorry", but the fact is, I'm not. However, I am feeling somewhat guilty ...
I thought it only polite to warn you that I've conscripted you into
a discussion.
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Have we addressed your concerns? (please reply there) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I hope you can come to this WWI editathon on 23 November. It will be an opportunity to get access to some of the less easily available resources of the State Library. The event would really benefit from the application of your editing skill and subject knowledge! Cheers, Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 00:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 5 Service Flying Training School RAAF 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
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF 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
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:56, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
02:17, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Would you be interested in posting a review in the FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/No. 38 Squadron RAAF/archive1? It's been open for a couple of weeks now and hasn't attracted many comments. Please post a critical review if you don't think that the article is up to scratch! Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 04:01, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Frank Headlam 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
GA bot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
09:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've submitted this article for FA review and have addressed some concerns by one reviewer but am looking for more feedback so the article can be promoted (or not, I suppose). Would you mind taking a look and chiming in on anything you think needs addressing?The FA review page is here. Thank you! 87Fan ( talk) 16:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Don't know what it is about stacked images, but they rarely play nice with my setup... Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:33, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 6 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frank Headlam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after evacuating his base in Dutch Timor following bombing by the Japanese in 1942, Frank Headlam (pictured) returned to Darwin, Australia, the same day it suffered its first air raid? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Headlam. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am very pleased to present you with this A-class medal with swords to acknowledge your success in developing the No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF, No. 33 Squadron RAAF, and Bobby Gibbes articles to A-class status. Please keep them coming! Nick-D ( talk) 10:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, Ian. Not wishing to press you in any way, but with nine supports, no opposes, no significant comments in 10 days and no outstanding issues, I'd say that Symphony No. 8 (Sibelius) is ready to go. If there is a reason for holding it, perhaps you'd let me know so that I can deal with it. Brianboulton ( talk) 07:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Are there supposed to be two "Older nominations" sections on the FAC page? You restored the second one here, but without comment, so I can't tell if that was intentional. Curly Turkey ( gobble) 03:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
this edit seems to have gotten lost (due to the fact that it did not have a : or a * to force a return.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:27, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Eisenhower dollar's been at three supports for a week now. I am anxious to nominate Adam Eckfeldt since it is rather short and I will be at the ANA library on Friday and Saturday, and I'd like to give reviewers some opportunity (I was frankly hoping for longer but did not want to rush a promotion with Sherwood on the clock) to ask sourcing questions and have me on the spot able to answer them. If it is OK, I will nominate Eckfeldt.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your comments at the Kellie Loder FAC. I have made the changes you recommended to the article and have responded on the FAC page. I would be glad to address any further concerns you have regarding the article.
Neelix ( talk) 14:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Northern Area Command (RAAF) 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
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
16:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that you bolded Grace Sherwood on WP:FA, however it has never been on Main Page ( Talk:Grace Sherwood claims that this article has been on main page's today's featured article section on 31 October, 2010, however I've checked Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 2010 and found out that the article which appeared on TFA section on that day is Tropical Storm Chantal, not Grace Sherwood). If you can't find evidence to support your claim, then I'll revert your edit.-- RekishiEJ ( talk) 16:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
The article
Northern Area Command (RAAF) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Northern Area Command (RAAF) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
08:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Ian Rose. Would you please see my idea here? Maybe you and/or other FA delegates might be interested in helping draft or review the proposed draft, when it's ready? I've never tried this before. But I figure the attention is deserved. =) Thanks for all your work here. Biosthmors ( talk) 11:00, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, In case you haven't seen it, the Canberra Times published an obituary of Gordon Steege earlier this week. It's online here. The most recent edition of the Air Force News also had an obituary. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, curious what the holdup here is. 5S, image and source review (not spotchecks), open for almost a month. Not sure what else I need. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, articles Rapunzel (Disney) and Botany could be closed as withdrawn (see nominator statements in nominations). And Calculus needs some fixing of it's FA-category and talkpage status. Not sure, what happened (or i'd fix it), but maybe the nomination was closed out of process somehow. Just notifying you, in case you haven't seen the messages about it. Thanks for your great work on FA-nominations, let's hope one of your colleagues soon comes back from break to help :). GermanJoe ( talk) 14:20, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Can you please tell me what is the status of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Talk That Talk (Rihanna song)/archive1 at the moment? Thanks. — Tomíca (T2ME) 09:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
First, let me thank you for taking the time to assess the article Frederick C. Billard. I had intended to write a lead, but I guess it got lost in the shuffle. If you could take a peek at the lead I have written and re-assess the article I would be grateful Any other suggestions would be helpful. Thank you again... Cuprum17 ( talk) 17:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
I just wanted to offer you my sincere thanks, on behalf of the whole FA community, for your continuous efforts keeping the Featured process running smoothly. It's a great service for Wikipedia, and I'm personally very grateful that you continue to do it. Thanks a million! – Quadell ( talk) 13:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hi there! You are cordially invited to an edit-a-thon this Saturday (21 September) in Sydney at the State Library of New South Wales (SLNSW), where you can collaborate with other Wikipedians throughout the day. Andy Carr, a senior librarian at SLNSW will also be helping out. The theme of the edit-a-thon is paralympics sports, but you are free to come along to meet other wiki contributors, and edit other topics.
If you are unable to attend in person, we will also be collaborating online. Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/September 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 09:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Wikipedians in Sydney)
The guideline WP:PROSPLIT says; "If unsure [about spliting], or with high profile or sensitive articles, start a "Split" discussion on the article talk page, and consider informing any associated WikiProject." and "If unsure, then use a template, and start a discussion on the article talkpage." I followed the guidelines on the Sea article (which is at FAC) and I added a "split" template at the to of the article and started a section for discussion on the Sea article talk page and provided an update on the FAC. I did this to invite discussion without canvassing. Splitting off the "Sea in culture" section shorted the article from 78 kB to 62 kB. Following that, incremental expansions and improvements increased the article size to the currently size of about 68 kB and there are more possible omissions to be discussed. Being objective about what the guideline says about the suitability of an article for splitting at WP:TOOBIG, it seems to me that another split is indicated and that "Humans and the sea" could be split off. Of course, a summery of it would be written for the "Sea" article, which would then be mainly on the topic of the basic sciences of the seas. The Sea article is currently at FAC and some of the reviewers had finished their review before the article expanded far above the 60 kB size, and they may not realised how large the article has become. Seeing a need for more discussion, I displayed a template at the top of the Sea article, but one of the nominators soon left me a message on my talk page asking me to remove it, which I have done. However, I would like to ask if you are aware of anything wrong with using maintenance tags or templates on articles to invite discussion when they are at FAC? Would it be reasonable to ask for opinions on article size on relevant WP talk pages during an FAC? Snowman ( talk) 14:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
On a related topic, I would be interested to know what would be the outcome of an FAC, if a large portion (about 50%) of an article was split off during an FAC. Presumably, a huge split would make most of the discussion in the FAC up to that point out-of-date. Could the FAC be restarted? If the FAC is void, would the nominators be able to nominate the article again, and if so are there any guidelines on how soon? Snowman ( talk) 19:36, 19 September 2013 (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)
23:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, user ViperSnake151 has withdrawn his FAC on HTC One. -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 02:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, there is talk on the Kosciuszko review page about adding an image. Your opinion would be appreciated. -- Gwillhickers 15:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Oops! I will remove the construction tag. An oversight... I've done enough damage to the article as it is. It had to be on of the toughest article I ever worked on due to a definite lack off references at covered the man's life. Cuprum17 ( talk) 23:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 25 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Northern Area Command (RAAF), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that as Air Officer Commanding RAAF Northern Area in 1941, Frank Lukis was responsible for air defence along the entire north coast of Australia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Northern Area Command (RAAF). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 05:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
That's standard infobox conventions / parameters, why the revert? Giant Snowman 08:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I must have imagined when you said "the convention I employ has been accepted in many articles at GAN, A-Class Review and FAC" then... Giant Snowman 15:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
Congratulations on your success with Bobby Gibbes. I enjoyed reading the article immeasurably and I'm happy that my vote of support counted for its well deserved promotion! Cassianto Talk 12:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Bobby Gibbes. TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Since I have a fairly good track record at FAC, I'd like to be able to nominate two articles simultaneously if I have two ready to go. Most of my normal collaborators are going to be busy for the foreseeable future and I'd like the ability to run two noms without any collaborator if necessary.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 05:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I commented on the FAC for Peru national football team. The nominator, User:MarshalN20 then stalked one of my GA reviews that I asked him not to interfere with. I raised the issue at the GA discussion page, and that user became belligerent. I withdrew from the FAC and stated that my comments stand. The nominator twice removed my comments improperly from the FAC:
I have mention this and related matters at WP:AN/I#Please advise. I raise this to your attention for whatever action or sanction you may see fit.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 16:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, if you might be interested, it would be privilege to nominate you for adminship. Thanks. Wifione Message 18:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
G'day, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. I look forward to working with you over the next year. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
As one of a highly select international group, you are hereby invited to join me in celebrating my 666! (Let the games begin!) Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
I have nominated Albert Ball as a Featured Article candidate. Because you were a major influence on the present text, I have mentioned you on the FAR nomination page as such, with a notation that you are are being invited to become a co-nominator. I would be delighted to have you on board as such, though not at the expense of compromising your other WP duties.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 23:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Ian,
Welcome aboard! My apologies for not thinking to ask you to give the text one last once-over. To mine eyes, it read fine. Your edits prove otherwise. I do promise you, I will not repeat this neglect if we share future FARs.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You're being contacted as you've previously used global message delivery (or its English Wikipedia counterpart). It doesn't feel so great to be spammed, does it? ;-)
For the past few months, Legoktm has built a replacement to the current message delivery system called MassMessage. MassMessage uses a proper user interface form (no more editing a /Spam subpage), works faster (it can complete a large delivery in minutes), and no longer requires being on an access list (any local administrator can use it). In addition, many tiny annoyances with the old system have been addressed. It's a real improvement! :-)
You can test out MassMessage here:
testwiki:Special:MassMessage. The biggest difference you'll likely notice is that any input list must use a new {{#target:}}
parser function. For example, {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales}}
or {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales|test2.wikipedia.org}}
. For detailed instructions, check out
mw:Help:Extension:MassMessage.
If you find any bugs, have suggestions for additional features, or have any other feedback, drop a note at m:Talk:MassMessage. Thanks for spamming! -- MZMcBride ( talk) 05:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I'm very pleased to award you the A-class medal with diamonds to recognise your excellent work in developing the Gordon Steege, Frank Headlam and No. 36 Squadron RAAF to A-class status. This makes you only the second person to ever receive this award. Nick-D ( talk) 10:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For placing second in the June 2013 Military History Article Writing Contest with 121 points from 17 entries, I am delighted to present you with The Writer's Barnstar. Well done! Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 11:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Ian Rose for his fine efforts in the September 2013 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 61 points from seven articles. Well done! Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 11:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
And all I did was invite you to share the celebration of my anniversary. Clearly, totally inadequate!
What can I say? Ah!! I know: "It may have taken a few years, but clearly, others, too, are now starting/continuing to acknowledge your truly impressive abilities".
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC) (And no, this is not just the cynical response of a grumpy old man.)
Ian, you opened this review page over three weeks ago, but haven't yet been back to start the actual review. Will you be able to commence soon? If you're not going to be able to do it, we can put it back into the GAN reviewing pool for you. Please let us know. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I'm currently hitting up all the editors who reviewed Operation Tungsten at its ACR to see if they could also review it for FA status. If you have the time, I'd appreciate it if you could also post a review. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 11:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've raised some concerns about this editor to Graham Colm, can you view my post on his talk page? You might remember him from the Priyanka Chopra first nomination. I don't want to make Graham's talk page a battleground, but I was wondering if you think that the weight of his actions at FAC and FLC to date would be enough to ban him from contributing to the FA process? I think it's clear that he's too immature to deal with the process and that he's incapable of addressing criticism. And it's not as if he's a star FA contributor, I think his lack of basic English in his posts is proof that he's clearly had a lot of help on his articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I don't want to put anybody off contributing to articles of course, and Prashant does have an enthusiasm for wikipedia and genuinely wants to improve Indian cinema articles. But I don't think FAC is for him because of his inability to deal with criticism and opposition and it isn't fair on the people who bother to review his articles and have to put up with his accusations and silly behaviour on talk pages.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Graham for the response. Well, Prashant appears to have begun a course at a university so is unlikely to be anywhere near as active as he was on here. Perhaps he'll mature in university. If he's going to be largely inactive then I don't think its worth the trouble to try to get consensus on the matter. But seeing his further recent remarks and disruptive reverting of the list [4] perhaps it's for his own good that he's banned. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Why are you doing this Blofeld? I thought were good hearted. But, you are trying to get me blocked. So that you can take over my flc. Huh? It's very painful. Also don't you think you are over reacting and presenting a story by adding spices. FYI, I was calmly addressing all comments and got 4 supports. Then, one oppose came and you started to show that your version was better and article was yours. Then, I got angry over you not those reviewers. You only tells one side of the story, which is very bad to do. Try to be be a honest man first. You're my idol on Wikipedia and you'll always will. let put aside our tiff and become friends and you are right I'll not be active like begor as I have started my university life, also my English is improving (I'm an engineering student). I'm also improving as a person and surely will be mature enough to deal with all kind of pressures here and in my life too. Thanks.— Prashant 19:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm being as honest as I possibly can. Your further actions this evening which include disruptive reverting and edit summaries attacking other editors over the list and then proceeding to "strongly oppose" an article I'm involved with at FAC with no real justification for doing so on top of the way you've already acted with the Chopra article and list clearly states that you're too immature to deal with the difficulties that FAC throws at you. I'm not suggesting a block of you from editing wikipedia, just a banning from the process of FA in which you've repeatedly shown yourself to be disruptive and unable to learn from your mistakes. Your anger is uncontrollable and it isn't fair on other editors who contribute there in good faith. Anyway let's not continue this here, I'll be opening an RFC on you tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. OK I will postpone it for now, but I've already given him about 5 chances to stop behaving like this. Given that he's repeatedly shown himself unable to learn from his mistakes, I'm certain that he'll continue to act like this. I don't know how long it will take before he's mature enough to not react in this way to people and understand that wikipedia isn't a personal competition. He's only 19, but even for that age his level of maturity is well below average. He admits to Rambling Man that he has anger issues and personal problems but that isn't an excuse for taking out his problems on here. Perhaps the block will shock him and he'll think twice about doing this sort of thing again. But if I see one instance of disruption at FAC again from him and incivility towards contributors then there really is no alternative but to ban him from the process.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:32, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think he needs to be blocked indefinitely until he convince us that he's over his personal problems as if he isn't blocked now he'll continue to dig a deeper hole for himself. But be wary of him. He can issue can apology and then within minutes do something completely the opposite. I think he needs to learn a lesson that he can't act like this here and get away with it. He's been almost entirely disruptive the last few weeks on here aside from addressing the FLC comments.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of George Jones (RAAF officer) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 26, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite ( talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 26, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
George Jones (1896–1992) was a senior commander in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). He served as Chief of the Air Staff from 1942 to 1952, the longest continuous tenure of any RAAF chief. During World War I, Jones fought as an infantryman at Gallipoli before transferring to the Australian Flying Corps. Posted to a fighter squadron in France, he achieved seven victories to become an ace, and was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. After a short spell in civilian life, he joined the newly formed RAAF in 1921, and rose steadily through training and personnel commands prior to World War II. Jones was a surprise appointee as Chief of the Air Staff, and his achievements in the position were coloured by a divisive relationship with the head of RAAF Command, Air Vice Marshal William Bostock. This was partly the result of a divided command structure, which neither man had any direct role in shaping. After World War II, Jones had overall responsibility for transforming what was then the world's fourth largest air force into a peacetime service that was also able to meet overseas commitments in Malaya and Korea. He was promoted to air marshal in 1948, and knighted in 1953. ( Full article...)
UcuchaBot ( talk) 23:02, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Terrific article. Well deserved TFA. Silent Billy ( talk) 09:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, just a quick question. Is it OK to create sub-pages for discussions to Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates or would it disturb some bots? I have compiled a laundry list of possible suggestions and ideas at User:GermanJoe/sandbox2 and would like to copy it over for discussion. The list is just too long and unwieldy to use the regular talkpage. GermanJoe ( talk) 13:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, in recognition of your dedication in reviewing 24 Military History good article nominations, peer review requests, A-Class nominations and/or Featured Article candidates during the period July to September 2013, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Well done and thanks, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 05:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tadeusz Kościuszko/archive1 has been open for over two months now and it still doesn't look like it's going to finish soon, as other editors keep tweaking the article. Can I nominate another article, since two months have passed, and there's little I can do to improve the stability of TK's article? Disclaimer: I am a WP:CUP participant, and I'd like to have a chance at getting one of my articles FA-ed before this years CUP ends :> PS. I intend to nominate Casimir Pulaski. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of No. 36 Squadron RAAF to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 10:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I have been reading and watching the WP article on the No. 36 Squadron RAAF for a few weeks and notice your obvious interest and work on the subject.
Reading the history section, I note that the squadron was formed on 11 March 1942. My late father joined that squadron as a flight mechanic just one month later, on 20 April 1942 and he served with it until the end of 1944. He flew and worked within Australia and between Australia and New Guinea moving supplies and troops. My brother and I recently donated a small amount of memorabilia that I had, to the RAAF Museum (three 36 squadron Christmas cards from 1943 and 1944 , a 1943 36 squadron printed 'Message to home' memo). They were pleased to receive these items and regard them as rare. There is also a photo of our dad servicing 'his' DC-3. It was Tony Moclair that suggested I contact the museum.
I thought you may be interested in our family connection to the squadron. Regards Greg. Melbourne3163 ( talk) 16:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
I can't seem to find WP guidance on the above, and decided to call upon your vast experience. Someone has added a couple of categories on Lists of World War I flying aces to serve as lists. The problem arises that these lists never shall be complete, as non-notable aviators will never show up on them. I have marked the category/lists with that information, and added a note to the anchor page that they are incomplete. That has led to a bit of a bun fight, as another editor claims warning the reader of incompletion is vandalism!
At any rate, as I gen up replacements for these atrocities, I also wonder if you are aware of any consensus, MOS entry, etc. concerning the use of categories as lists. It seems to me this usage will spawn misinformation amongst the readers.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, as you probably know I'm spending a bit of time trying to reference a number of the RAAF squadron articles. I've hit a snag with No. 13 Squadron RAAF and No. 450 Squadron RAAF, both of which have information for which I can't find a ref. I have a feeling some of it might be in the official history, so I will eventually try to go through those, but I wonder if you might have a ref for some of the statements I've marked with citation needed tags? Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, If you haven't seen Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/IPhone 5S/archive2 you might want to look in - I think that it should be closed. Nick-D ( talk) 04:45, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I don't want to deal with personal attacks. Can you please take care of this for me? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian, this is a bit dusty and in need of expansion, but you're welcome to use or adapt it if you'd like. Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:58, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. I noticed this edit to the Albert Ball article. I saw the comment at the FAC by Dank that led to that edit. I can drop by the FAC to explain that wording, or I can restore the wording and make it clearer. I originally added the text in question here. I'm leaving this note here, as if I drop by the FAC myself I may get drawn into reviewing the article or adding the older talk page material that was discussed some years ago, and I can't really spare the time for that. I was also reminded of that e-mail I sent you at the time (this was two years ago now!) where you asked for some sources. Did you ever do anything with those? I could add those as well if I get time. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Dropping this note back here, as I don't want to overwhelm the FAC with it. The position I'm in here Ian, is that I spent time (a lot of time) going over this with you and George on the talk page two years ago, and you were quite open to at least some of the material being added, but everyone seemed to drift away to do other things. What has changed?
I accept the fact that I never got round to adding the detail is entirely my fault, but I had in part assumed you would actually use those sources you (Ian) asked me to e-mail you. Did you ever get that e-mail two years ago? I would also have returned to this article if I had been aware that it was going to be put up for FAC, but the first I heard of it was when George dropped me a note on my talk page. I should at the time, instead of declining the proposed co-nomination, have said that there was unfinished discussion on the talk page and maybe asked for the review to be put on hold for a few days (I am used to co-nominations being sorted out before a review is started, not after it has started). But by the time I had thought of that, things had moved on. Surely I was not the only one who remembered those discussions?
I think one of the less common points of FACs is precisely to make sure that there are not unresolved issues hanging around on a talk page. Certainly when I was reviewing, one of the things I tried to remember to do was to check the talk page of the article under review for such things. <shrug> Maybe it is acceptable to leave things until after the review has concluded, I don't know. I just want to be sure that the time I invested two years ago looking up various things isn't wasted. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The article is good now, regardless what some editors who opposed said. I can provide you good reasons to why the article couldn't pass before and why it can now. Regardless, you should pay attention to people with no knowledge of the subject. -- Lecen ( talk) 02:03, 23 October 2013 (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)
22:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 19:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Shinano looks like it's almost ready to be promoted. Can I go ahead and nom another article?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:36, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your closing verse,
I think that many could do worse.
I promise this, dear Mr Rose,
my next attempt will be in prose.
Cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, I'm just in the process of verifying the entries for the October contest and just wanted to clarify your Bobby Gibbes entry. The article history seems to show it was promoted to FA in late September, so I think it wouldn't be eligible for the October contest. Have I misinterpreted this, or did you mean to list a different article? Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 08:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian! I have removed Bobby Gibbes entry in the October contest tally because the upgrade from A-class to FA-class appears to have taken place in September, and the improvement was actually tallied in September contest. Did you mean to enter a different article?-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 10:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
There is a backstage pass coming up to be followed by an editathon in the State Library of New South Wales on 23 November. This is the first time that an Australian cultural institution has opened its doors to us in this way and will be a special opportunity because the Library is providing: one of its best rooms; its expert curators (along with their expertise and their white gloves); a newly launched website (containing new resources); and of course, items from its collection (including rare and usually unavailable material) which we can look at, learn from, and use, to improve WP articles. For example, on the chosen topic (Australia and WWI), the Library holds many diaries and manuscripts from the period.
As you can see from the Library's project page, they have connected this editathon with their own work. They have already set out a wide range of resources to make things easier for us. Please sign up on the editathon project page if you can participate either online or in person with other Wikipedians. Hope to see you there! Lankiveil ( speak to me) 12:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
This message has been delivered using AutoWikiBrowser to all users in Category:Wikipedians in Sydney.
![]() |
The Half Barnstar | |
On behalf of the article's future audience, I hereby award Ian Rose The Half Barnstar for collaborating with Georgejdorner on Albert Ball. Thank you for getting the article to FA class. Regards, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 07:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Albert Ball to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 11:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Teamwork Barnstar |
Presented to my exemplar of Wikipedianism. Albert Ball would not be a Featured Article without your efforts. Georgejdorner ( talk) 15:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Hello,
About a month ago, I nominated the article AdS/CFT correspondence for FA status. Since then, I've gotten a lot of helpful comments from other editors, and everyone has been quite supportive of the project. However, it's been a week since anyone left a comment, and I'm not sure that there will be more comments unless I recruit more people. Please let me know if there's anything I need to do to make sure the article gets the attention it needs. I wouldn't want it to be archived just because there weren't enough reviews.
Thanks. Polytope24 ( talk) 01:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Gday Ian. Are you comfortable with the ACR for this one being listed for closure as successful? I note its got 3 spts (counting your provisional spt). It has also been reviewed by a few other editors who have just made cmts. Been open since 24 Aug so its been around for a while. All the best. Anotherclown ( talk) 03:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Ian. I've finally made it back to London after six weeks' exile. Happy to do the Nasser spot-check now or to wait till FAC, whichever you prefer. Tim riley ( talk) 18:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your comments at the Nefarious: Merchant of Souls featured article candidacy, for pinging Cliftonian on the subject, and for soliciting a source check. Cliftonian has completed his review and Quadell completed the source check. Please let me know if you have any remaining concerns.
Neelix ( talk) 21:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, Ian Rose, I hope you're doing well!
Over at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck (film)/archive1, I think we're ready for closure, what do you think?
Do you think it could be closed at this time?
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 23:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
These comments by Quadell may explain a bit more: "I don't see any further problems with the lead. It effectively summarizes the article, and provides a proverbial "hook". Yes, it does feel a bit choppy to go from one celebrity's random thought to the next loosely-related thought, but I've seen the film; it's a choppy mishmash of themes around a charged word. I don't think any accurate, brief summary could seem much more fluid than what this lead provides." So, you see, the contents of the film itself progresses in a bit of a "choppy" manner, so if the reader gets that impression from the Wikipedia article text, that means it is an accurate representation of the film itself, and that is a good thing! You see? — Cirt ( talk) 19:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Update: Thanks very much, Ian Rose, for your suggestion to ask John to help with some copy editing, the article looks much better for his efforts! I've addressed all the concerns he raised, and he has since commented with an additional "Support" at the FAC page. Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 21:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
I was just wondering if you're satisfied with the recent spotchecks of this article. I believe the article is well cited, but it looks like people so far have had trouble confirming this due to the technical nature of the topic. Please let me know if there's anything I can do. Thank you. Polytope24 ( talk) 02:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
If one looks at Rudolph Berthold, it becomes apparent it should be Rudolf Berthold. The redirect that switches the latter to the former should be eradicated. I know there is an instruction concerning the procedure, but darned if I can locate it. Given that you are the most brilliant admin I know, I thought I would ask if you know where that procedure can be found.
Cheers.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:15, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I hope you can keep this open a few days longer. I am dealing with Harries's replies to my review points but I'm involved with a few other things as well, on and offline, so it may take me a day or two. PS: I haven't forgotten the sources review. Brianboulton ( talk) 13:21, 17 November 2013 (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)
05:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You're being contacted as you're listed as an EdwardsBot user.
MassMessage has been deployed to all Wikimedia wikis. For help using the new tool, please check out its help page or drop a note on Meta-Wiki.
With over 400,000 edits to Wikimedia wikis, EdwardsBot has served us well; however EdwardsBot will no longer perform local or global message delivery after December 31, 2013.
A huge thanks to Legoktm, Reedy, Aaron Schulz and everyone else who helped to get MassMessage deployed. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 02:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
I appreciated being recommended as a copyeditor. This recognition of my efforts by you meant more to me than most of my Barnstars. Thanks! -- John ( talk) 21:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. What do you think about an article on the Pritzker Military Museum & Library's GLAM project ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:GLAM/Pritzker ) for a future issue of The Bugle? I don't think that many Wikipedians interested in military history know that they can use the Library's resources (which can be found at www.pritzkermilitary.org) for editing Wikipedia articles on military history topics. TeriEmbrey ( talk) 17:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Just a quick note about a page that could qualify either as article or list (although I think it may be more in your bailiwick than mine). It's The Office (U.S. season 9), which is currently at FLC. I think Crisco has probably called it right in saying article, but before I fail the nom, can I just check he won't get advised to come back to FLC is he tries the list avenue? Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
After consideration of some of the reviewers comments, I feel I need to withdraw the nom for Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl to allow it to go through a copy edit. I also dropped this same note at the other FA coordinators talk page. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 17:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian,
The following articles of interest to you have been listed for deletion:
Additionally, I have held in abeyance the nomination of Patrick Gordon Taylor in hopes that you might have reliable source(s) for his acedom.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I should be able to take another look at the article tonight. Please don't close the FAC until I've had a chance to return; I've had several FACs closed in the past right before I was planning to comment again, and I want to avoid that this time. Giants2008 ( Talk) 18:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Ian, it is doubtless an exceptionally minor point, but the reference to Flight Royal that you have just amended was copied directly from the cover and inner pages of the book. Whilst the ISBN reference capitalises the title, I think that the error lies in that place. Indeed, if you look at http://www.isbnsearch.org/isbn/0850594901 (which is the book I have) you will see how the title is presented on the cover. Cheers Lexysexy ( talk) 10:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF 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
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
05:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
The article Gemini (2002 Tamil film) is currently a FAC. Would u like to suggest improvements? ---- Kailash29792 ( talk) 15:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 34 Squadron RAAF 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
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
09:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
12:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 34 Squadron RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 34 Squadron RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
As I think it's pretty clear that Asahi will be promoted, can I nominate another article?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 17:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
The above article seems to have no pending issues; thus, it is a candidate for closing its A Class review. As one of the reviewers, could you please take appropriate action?
Georgejdorner ( talk) 20:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Yes, am a beginner (obviously), but have much enthusiasm for the page 37 Squadron and also the broader topic Lockheed C-130 Hercules in Australian service. I will have a look through the pointers you sent me and start trying to make it better. Appreciate the feedback. Trojan Historian ( talk) 19:47, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey there, I hope this isn't rude or out of line for me to ask, but how are we looking so far over here? Do you think we hurt ourselves having three nominators?-- Sexy Kick 21:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
Just a final note as part of tidying up my departure.
If the assessment rubrics are to be supplemented by a check list of required usages, listing such in a public place within WP would benefit all editors. Nominating editors could actually be prepared for their assessments, and the reviewers' work load would be lessened. I realize this recommendation is too simple and commonsensical to be enacted, as it provides no opportunities for whiz-bang coding, but I thought I would mention it.
Of course, actually letting nominators know what the rules are would take all the fun out of "assessment via ambush", but the reviewers so deprived could find a dog to kick for their amusement.
Now, on a personal level, the only thing I shall miss about no longer being here in WP is you. Your geniality, common sense, and even temperament have made you a joy to know. While we have crossed swords at times, I have always had the greatest respect and admiration for your expertise.
If the assessment department ever does decide on transparency in its assessments, please drop me an email. Under those circumstances, I would be tempted to return and resume my drive to promote bios, preferably all the way to FA.
Best regards, George. Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 482 Squadron RAAF 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)
22:02, 14 December 2013 (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)
00:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Could you archive the FA nomination of How Brown Saw the Baseball Game? Consider it a withdrawal. Thanks in advance. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 04:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
"Assessment by ambush" is basically an unfair system of random requirements, for which the newbie cannot prepare. If the excuse for not codifying requirements is that they are constantly evolving, well, so are Wikipedia's articles. If the articles can be written down subject to change, so can the checklist.
Right now, the assessment system is swamped. A checklist would help alleviate that problem. Reading through the checklist would give pause to the unprepared, and delay nominations that are bound to fail until they are truly ready. The actual assessments that are nominated could be processed much more quickly. Better prepared nominations would lessen the assessors' work loads, and speed up the assessment process. Cripes, assessments might even become sort of fun.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 18:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
Please archive the above nomination, as I am no longer working on it.
Thank you. Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, the nomination of McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II has stalled. I'm wondering if you could give it a look and provide some insight to get the nomination rolling again. Regards, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 05:23, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Since my FAC for Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey hasn't been too intensive (2 supports, and a successful image view check), and likely would be done in the next week or two, could I begin a nomination for another article ( A Song for Simeon)? Or would you prefer I wait? I do have the time to handle both.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 17:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
featured articles
Thank you for quality articles, such as
Oswald Watt, and standing for the quality of featured articles in general. responsible for the best Wikipedia has to offer, for serving as
project coordinator and co-editor of its newsletter, for recognising "outstanding achievement", looking for the "profound, absurd or simply amusing" and seeing that "roads lead everywhere", - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (7 October 2010)!
The article
No. 482 Squadron RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 482 Squadron RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
07:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
FWiW Bzuk (
talk)
19:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
|
![]() I wish you a
Merry
Christmas and Happy New Year 2014!
|
Don't want to be the beggar during the holidays, but my life will get much less busier in the next few days. Can I have permission to renominate my FAC of How Brown Saw the Baseball Game? Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 02:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
|
Cheers, pina coladas all round! |
Damn need a few of these after a frenetic year and Xmas. Hope yours is a good one....Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 10:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Ian, In case you haven't spotted it, the RAAF Airpower Development Centre has recently posted digitalised copies of the Units of the RAAF series on its website at http://airpower.airforce.gov.au/Publications/List/45/Air-Force-Publications.aspx @ AustralianRupert: I think that you might also be interested. Nick-D ( talk) 05:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I left a note on AcDixon's talk page, but he hasn't been on wiki in a week or so. I know he said before that he's busy in his off-line life. I'm not sure how to proceed with the nomination. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 15:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 486 Squadron RAAF 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)
07:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Ian. Can you put List of awards and nominations received by Megadeth on the FA candidates list and start the discussion since there's that "Please feel free to initiate the nomination" on the talk page. It's my first FA nomination and some help would be welcomed. Cheers and Happy New Year!-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 09:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
We now have three supports at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Horse Protection Act of 1970/archive1. I think that means it's time for a FAC delegate to take a peek and close/promote? Just FYI. Thanks! Montanabw (talk) 21:10, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
Pony!
Congratulations! For promoting
Oxbow (horse) to FA, you have received a
pony! Ponies are cute, intelligent, cuddly, friendly (most of the time, though with notable exceptions), promote good will, encourage patience, and enjoy carrots. Treat your pony with respect and he will be your faithful friend!
Montanabw
(talk)
22:36, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
To send a pony or a treat to other wonderful and responsible editors,
click here.
![]() | On 2 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit staff were responsible for translating training material from French into English prior to delivery of the Dassault Mirage III to the RAAF? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Orlady ( talk) 16:24, 2 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Military history service award | |
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's June 2013 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Anotherclown ( talk) 12:56, 3 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Ian, I've archived this after an email request from Drmies. Is there anything else that needs to be done beyond adding the template and removing it from the main FAC page? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:05, 4 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. I have an FAC delegate query I wanted to run past you, if that is okay? Alan McNicoll has been at FAC for a month and a half now and, despite two supports and no outstanding issues or comments, has not attracted attention of any kind since its last review (by you, that is) on 12 June. Considering the review is so close to gaining the required support, yet edging closer and closer to potential closure due to the time it has been open, I am of course anxious to try and get a few editors to have a look and possibly review the article. I was thinking of leaving a note on the talk pages of the editors who reviewed the article for A-Class to see if they would be interested in having a look. However, I wasn't sure if such a thing was okay or a giant no-no, so wanted to run it by you first. Other than that, I'm not sure what I can do. I have already posted a note to Milhist, but that didn't work unfortunately. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 03:12, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. Sorry to be a pain again. Crisco has kindly reviewed the article and, during the process, completed an image check. As is always the case, the post-1945 images have been questioned. As someone who has kept abreast of the image debates over the last couple of years and is thus likely to know where to point to, I was wondering if you'd mind popping over and having a look? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 05:20, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've started an RFC on proposed adjustments to the governance of the featured-article forums. Tony (talk) 11:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
My Garden Warbler has three supports, no opposes or outstanding issues, is it premature to throw Pacific Swift to the wolves? Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 12:17, 8 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 9 July 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the concrete bunker housing RAAF North-Eastern Area Command's operational headquarters during World War II was topped with a suburban house to mislead enemy aircraft? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:04, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
per #Ping! above, Oxbow (horse) appears to be ready for your review and potential promotion to FA at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Oxbow (horse)/archive1 when it arrives in the proper spot in your work queue. Thanks Montanabw (talk) 19:29, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian, I requested a source check on the talk page of Wikipedia Featured Artcle Candidates. But, no one has yet reviewed the sources. Would you pls, ask an experienced source reviewer to review it. Thanks.— Prashant 03:56, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I see 5 articles were promoted today, but not Drowning Girl FAC, which has 3 supports, an image check and a source check in its 30 day under review. What gives? Can I nominate Whaam! now? I am working towards a 9/28 50th anniversary for that work and would like to get the FAC started.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 17:23, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
Since you are a participant at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Whaam!, I am informing you that Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Whaam!/archive1 is now open.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 21:16, 14 July 2013 (UTC)
I noticed this edit. It was curious, but it seemed like you were going to award the FOUR. However, you have made no edits since. What is going on? Also, why did you close Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Whaam! yesterday? Is there a policy against an article being at FAC and MILHIST A-Class?-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ BIO/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:FOUR) 12:08, 15 July 2013 (UTC)
Hasn't gotten its bright shiny star... Ealdgyth - Talk 12:23, 16 July 2013 (UTC)
Bot does seem very slow of late.. Tibetan Prayer ᧾ 19:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I'm very pleased to present you with this medal in recognition of your work in developing the No. 84 Wing RAAF, Lockheed C-130 Hercules in Australian service, and William Hely articles to A-class standard - thanks also for writing the sections of the C-130 article which reviewers didn't complain about in the FAC! Nick-D ( talk) 08:21, 18 July 2013 (UTC) |
Just so you know at FAC I'm the artist formerly known as Dr. Blofeld. Am editing under this account at least for the near future. Tibetan Prayer ᧾ 19:10, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
Gday Ian. Just letting you know I've added the review here: Talk:North-Eastern Area Command (RAAF)/GA1. When you get a chance pls have a look at my comments. Apologies for the delay I was called out of town for a while. Anotherclown ( talk) 19:41, 19 July 2013 (UTC)
Interstate 496 received a spotcheck at its ACR, like all newly promoted articles coming out of the Highway/USRD projects. Imzadi 1979 → 05:38, 20 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your advice with regards to the 2012 tour of She Has a Name FAC; it was good to see the article go up on the main page. I have had another FAC up for just under a month now and, while there has been a fair bit of discussion and I believe that all actionable objections have been resolved, only two editors have given their explicit support for the promotion. Of the seven editors who have contributed to the discussion, two have supported, one has decided to abstain, and four have no outstanding concerns but have neither supported nor declined. Of those remaining four, I know that at least one has simply been away from Wikipedia since their initial comments. Is the current level of support sufficient? If not, would you recommend that I contact the editors who have already commented to request that they make their stance explicit, or should I simply encourage more editors to contribute to the discussion? Any advice you are willing to provide would be greatly appreciated.
Neelix ( talk) 18:58, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I just recieved an odd looking email from your account with nothing but some odd text and a link to a URL - I fear that your account may have been hacked. If so, I hope the damage isn't too bad. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:42, 21 July 2013 (UTC)
Ugh. So now we know the email addys of the entire Wiki :) Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 00:47, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
hello Ian. Why did you revert my edits in this article? The whole album is classified as glam in the articles about the songs so why not this one. And have you ever heard Panic in Detroit? It's maybe the most typical glam rock song on the album. Just listen to it. And almost all the songs of Bowie from 1971 to 1974 is called glam in their articles. Far from all of them really is typical for this genre. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.157.72.4 ( talk) 12:54, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Ian, are you sure that the Uruguayan War FAC nomination was closed correctly? It has been almost ten days and the bot hasn't archived it. -- Lecen ( talk) 19:15, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I won't be available from August 16 to September 16. I will be traveling around north India and the foothills of the Himalayas. I hope you're not planning to be away at the same time. Best wishes, Graham. Graham Colm ( talk) 20:43, 22 July 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
I should like to ask a couple of favors from you. I would like you to look at the above and recommend any changes/improvements for its betterment. If you should happen to assess it as a "B" level article at the same time, my feelings wouldn't be hurt.
Many thanks, Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:42, 23 July 2013 (UTC)
Wow and gazow! Way beyond expectations...many thanks.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 15:17, 24 July 2013 (UTC)
Could you please respond to my request here? Thank you. -- William S. Saturn ( talk) 06:34, 25 July 2013 (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)
15:13, 25 July 2013 (UTC)
Apologies for my breach of etiquette at the Alkan FA page, and thanks for your assurance.-- Smerus ( talk) 08:36, 26 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi, just curious, is this soon to be promoted? -- JDC808 ♫ 03:26, 28 July 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
Spot of trouble here. I want to submit Werner Voss for A-Class review. I followed the assessment instructions and posted the template on the Talk page as "A-Class=current" and waited for the magic "currently undergoing" popup to appear...which it didn't. After chuntering about through the various help links and not finding a solution, I have turned to the Aussie godfather of WP aviation for help.
Can you show me what I did wrong in this process? I should like to learn it, as I have some more articles I would like to promote.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:03, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
I rummaged through everything, in edit view and in plain view, before messaging you, searching for that key to the nomination page. Now another editor has been editing the banners, so I looked again. Still no luck. This A-Class nomination process is such a pain in the ass I think I will give up the effort.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 14:13, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I hope I'm not stepping on any toes, but Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tales of Graces/archive1 was withdrawn by the nominator a few days ago, so I removed and archived it. Back in the day (which was a Tuesday, by the way) before I was a delegate, I and a couple others used to do these maintenance tasks occasionally to help out Sandy. -- Laser brain (talk) 13:56, 30 July 2013 (UTC)
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Djaoeh Dimata/archive1 looks to be essentially done. Could I nominate something before it is promoted? Boenga Roos dari Tjikembang shouldn't be too much of a burden on the queue. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 01:42, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
FYI, I will agree to a WP:CONSENSUS determined at an RFC after User:Rjanag gets back to me with some statistics on the project. I understand that it will take at least a week after he creates the new category to have the data. I am drafting the RFC here. You can follow along.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 08:14, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article Candidate reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:11, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
Hey, Ian, I'm so glad to see you updating FAS! But there's an error somewhere: [1] I don't have time to track it down ... perhaps a removal, perhaps an error at WP:FA, or perhaps a missing promotion (was it 36 or 37?) Best, SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:23, 1 August 2013 (UTC)
OK, that was it, it is sorted now ... have other redirects been put in archives? That shouldn't be happening ... getting name changes right at FAC is a challenge, and Gimme set up articlehistory so that it could handle name changes and this wouldn't happen, but nominators mess it up. If there are other redirects in archives, then archives will be wrong ... I 'spose I shouldn't worry any more about this, but we always kept very clean records ... :/ ... So, that FAC hasn't been botified, but then most aren't any more anyway ... so ... SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 12:27, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day Ian, something needs doing on the talk page, as it is not showing as FA. Bot should have run by now, surely... I'm marking it as checked in the July contest, but you might want to follow up. Regards, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:52, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Would you be able to explain why, as part of your recent edit to the above article, you appear to have reverted my edit? My change was within policy and justified, so I can see no valid reason for its reversion. I assume that this was a simple mistake, but in so doing, you reverted the sentence in question to a version which does not make grammatical sense. I would be glad if you could correct your error, or let me know that I can do so without further reversion. Thanks. 188.220.73.163 ( talk) 17:40, 7 August 2013 (UTC) (aka. Adrian M.H.)
G'day Ian, I'm wondering if we need to chat with the Article Alerts bot guys about the A-Class results, some of those articles should have shown up in the bot run last evening (Australian time), but didn't. Do you think that might be the problem? Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 23:27, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I still have a few concerns, which I have raised at the FAC a few moments ago. Graham Colm ( talk) 05:04, 10 August 2013 (UTC)
Meh, i was still typing at the FAC for Takhiagiin_Elbegdorj.
But no worries, just copied it to talk - see
Talk:Tsakhiagiin_Elbegdorj (agree with your close).
GermanJoe (
talk)
08:47, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
As Stone Mountain Memorial half dollar seems in good shape, is there objection to my moving ahead and nominating Eisenhower dollar?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 14:31, 12 August 2013 (UTC)
Just thought I'd let you know that Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/S&M (song)/archive10 has 7 supports and 0 opposes. All media and source checks have been done and dusted. — ₳ aron 18:10, 13 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian! Can you revise the nomination please? Thank you. — Tomíca (T2ME) 10:54, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
You should probably mention the 4000th FA milestone at WP:POST, WT:FA and WT:FAC.-- TonyTheTiger ( T/ C/ WP:FOUR/ WP:CHICAGO/ WP:WAWARD) 16:01, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Hamiltonstone responded to your comment at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Parity of zero/archive2; I'm not sure you saw. ceran thor 22:40, 14 August 2013 (UTC)
Sire, Your smallest wish is my command! Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi, this is a note to inform you that a page in which you have previously shown interest, WP:FOUR, has been nominated for deletion. Your comments would be appreciated. Thank you! — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:33, 15 August 2013 (UTC)
I'm puzzled by your comments on the Jesus FAC. One of the FA criteria is neutrality, and the objections I raised were primarily aimed at neutrality. They are normal objections (within a non-normal subject), and actionable in the usual way. Sources that aren't predisposed to one side can be supplemented or replaced with more neutral sources. More balanced representation of the various views can be added. Some of my objections had to do with flat out misrepresentation of sources. If that's not actionable, Wikipedia should shut down right now. It's not helpful (for example, doesn't help me improve future FAC contributions) to just dismiss objections as "not actionable." Strangesad ( talk) 04:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian Rose, I'm the main author/nominator of Stanley Bruce and this is my first time nominating something for FA status. I'm a bit lost on the nomination process because a lot of articles nominated after me have a lot more reviews/consensus being built but mine seems relatively untouched, though I've been diligent as I can fixing identified problems. I've realized now there is no set work order for the nominations and people review as they please, so does that mean I should be soliciting reviews from senior/knowledgeable types from around Wikipedia? I'm just worried my nomination will lapse for lack of consensus, which would be a shame after all the work I've put in. Unus Multorum ( talk) 07:41, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, I'm thinking of taking 15th Battalion (Australia) to A-class review. Before I do, though, I'd like someone who isn't so close to the topic to take a look. Would you mind taking a look and letting me know if it all makes sense? Any tweaks would be most welcome, too, of course. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 00:42, 17 August 2013 (UTC)
It hasn't been archived and the history hasn't been updated. Nominations promoted after this was promoted have already had the gold star put on the article. — ₳ aron 16:41, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
In case you missed it. GabeMc ( talk| contribs) 19:54, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
Upon rereading the leadup to Voss being nominated for A Class review, I realize that I may seemed somewhat churlish in my comments concerning you. When I bemoaned the lack of aid from you, it was more in the sense of, "If Ian can't help me, then I am beyond help," rather than, "Ian has given up on me." If I gave the impression I felt shunned by you, I apologize profusely. Such was not my intent. Certainly, over the years, you have given me more aid than any other WP editor or administrator. For that, I am thankful.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:20, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on William Hely. TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:44, 20 August 2013 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 22:44, 20 August 2013 (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)
23:48, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, could you please archive the candidancy for that article? I don't think it will pass for now and i need to get a peer review to do some C/E. thanks a lot - Eli + 10:55, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Thanks :) - Eli + 12:51, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
I should say "I'm sorry", but the fact is, I'm not. However, I am feeling somewhat guilty ...
I thought it only polite to warn you that I've conscripted you into
a discussion.
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:11, 22 August 2013 (UTC)
Have we addressed your concerns? (please reply there) -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 06:57, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I hope you can come to this WWI editathon on 23 November. It will be an opportunity to get access to some of the less easily available resources of the State Library. The event would really benefit from the application of your editing skill and subject knowledge! Cheers, Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 00:08, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 5 Service Flying Training School RAAF 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
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF 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
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
10:56, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 1 Operational Training Unit RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
GA bot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
02:17, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Would you be interested in posting a review in the FAC at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/No. 38 Squadron RAAF/archive1? It's been open for a couple of weeks now and hasn't attracted many comments. Please post a critical review if you don't think that the article is up to scratch! Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 04:01, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Frank Headlam 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
GA bot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
09:17, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've submitted this article for FA review and have addressed some concerns by one reviewer but am looking for more feedback so the article can be promoted (or not, I suppose). Would you mind taking a look and chiming in on anything you think needs addressing?The FA review page is here. Thank you! 87Fan ( talk) 16:57, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
Don't know what it is about stacked images, but they rarely play nice with my setup... Nikkimaria ( talk) 18:33, 5 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 6 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Frank Headlam, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after evacuating his base in Dutch Timor following bombing by the Japanese in 1942, Frank Headlam (pictured) returned to Darwin, Australia, the same day it suffered its first air raid? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Frank Headlam. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 6 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am very pleased to present you with this A-class medal with swords to acknowledge your success in developing the No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF, No. 33 Squadron RAAF, and Bobby Gibbes articles to A-class status. Please keep them coming! Nick-D ( talk) 10:39, 7 September 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, Ian. Not wishing to press you in any way, but with nine supports, no opposes, no significant comments in 10 days and no outstanding issues, I'd say that Symphony No. 8 (Sibelius) is ready to go. If there is a reason for holding it, perhaps you'd let me know so that I can deal with it. Brianboulton ( talk) 07:26, 8 September 2013 (UTC)
Are there supposed to be two "Older nominations" sections on the FAC page? You restored the second one here, but without comment, so I can't tell if that was intentional. Curly Turkey ( gobble) 03:56, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
this edit seems to have gotten lost (due to the fact that it did not have a : or a * to force a return.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:27, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Eisenhower dollar's been at three supports for a week now. I am anxious to nominate Adam Eckfeldt since it is rather short and I will be at the ANA library on Friday and Saturday, and I'd like to give reviewers some opportunity (I was frankly hoping for longer but did not want to rush a promotion with Sherwood on the clock) to ask sourcing questions and have me on the spot able to answer them. If it is OK, I will nominate Eckfeldt.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:19, 9 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your comments at the Kellie Loder FAC. I have made the changes you recommended to the article and have responded on the FAC page. I would be glad to address any further concerns you have regarding the article.
Neelix ( talk) 14:12, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
Northern Area Command (RAAF) 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
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
16:22, 10 September 2013 (UTC)
I noticed that you bolded Grace Sherwood on WP:FA, however it has never been on Main Page ( Talk:Grace Sherwood claims that this article has been on main page's today's featured article section on 31 October, 2010, however I've checked Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 2010 and found out that the article which appeared on TFA section on that day is Tropical Storm Chantal, not Grace Sherwood). If you can't find evidence to support your claim, then I'll revert your edit.-- RekishiEJ ( talk) 16:12, 11 September 2013 (UTC)
The article
Northern Area Command (RAAF) you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:Northern Area Command (RAAF) for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
AustralianRupert --
AustralianRupert (
talk)
08:32, 12 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings Ian Rose. Would you please see my idea here? Maybe you and/or other FA delegates might be interested in helping draft or review the proposed draft, when it's ready? I've never tried this before. But I figure the attention is deserved. =) Thanks for all your work here. Biosthmors ( talk) 11:00, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, In case you haven't seen it, the Canberra Times published an obituary of Gordon Steege earlier this week. It's online here. The most recent edition of the Air Force News also had an obituary. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 23:45, 13 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, curious what the holdup here is. 5S, image and source review (not spotchecks), open for almost a month. Not sure what else I need. — Crisco 1492 ( talk) 03:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, articles Rapunzel (Disney) and Botany could be closed as withdrawn (see nominator statements in nominations). And Calculus needs some fixing of it's FA-category and talkpage status. Not sure, what happened (or i'd fix it), but maybe the nomination was closed out of process somehow. Just notifying you, in case you haven't seen the messages about it. Thanks for your great work on FA-nominations, let's hope one of your colleagues soon comes back from break to help :). GermanJoe ( talk) 14:20, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Can you please tell me what is the status of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Talk That Talk (Rihanna song)/archive1 at the moment? Thanks. — Tomíca (T2ME) 09:31, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 16:20, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
First, let me thank you for taking the time to assess the article Frederick C. Billard. I had intended to write a lead, but I guess it got lost in the shuffle. If you could take a peek at the lead I have written and re-assess the article I would be grateful Any other suggestions would be helpful. Thank you again... Cuprum17 ( talk) 17:07, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Barnstar of Diligence |
I just wanted to offer you my sincere thanks, on behalf of the whole FA community, for your continuous efforts keeping the Featured process running smoothly. It's a great service for Wikipedia, and I'm personally very grateful that you continue to do it. Thanks a million! – Quadell ( talk) 13:00, 18 September 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
Hi there! You are cordially invited to an edit-a-thon this Saturday (21 September) in Sydney at the State Library of New South Wales (SLNSW), where you can collaborate with other Wikipedians throughout the day. Andy Carr, a senior librarian at SLNSW will also be helping out. The theme of the edit-a-thon is paralympics sports, but you are free to come along to meet other wiki contributors, and edit other topics.
If you are unable to attend in person, we will also be collaborating online. Details and an attendee list are at Wikipedia:Meetup/Sydney/September 2013. Hope you can make it! John Vandenberg 09:19, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
(this automated message was delivered using replace.py to all users in Wikipedians in Sydney)
The guideline WP:PROSPLIT says; "If unsure [about spliting], or with high profile or sensitive articles, start a "Split" discussion on the article talk page, and consider informing any associated WikiProject." and "If unsure, then use a template, and start a discussion on the article talkpage." I followed the guidelines on the Sea article (which is at FAC) and I added a "split" template at the to of the article and started a section for discussion on the Sea article talk page and provided an update on the FAC. I did this to invite discussion without canvassing. Splitting off the "Sea in culture" section shorted the article from 78 kB to 62 kB. Following that, incremental expansions and improvements increased the article size to the currently size of about 68 kB and there are more possible omissions to be discussed. Being objective about what the guideline says about the suitability of an article for splitting at WP:TOOBIG, it seems to me that another split is indicated and that "Humans and the sea" could be split off. Of course, a summery of it would be written for the "Sea" article, which would then be mainly on the topic of the basic sciences of the seas. The Sea article is currently at FAC and some of the reviewers had finished their review before the article expanded far above the 60 kB size, and they may not realised how large the article has become. Seeing a need for more discussion, I displayed a template at the top of the Sea article, but one of the nominators soon left me a message on my talk page asking me to remove it, which I have done. However, I would like to ask if you are aware of anything wrong with using maintenance tags or templates on articles to invite discussion when they are at FAC? Would it be reasonable to ask for opinions on article size on relevant WP talk pages during an FAC? Snowman ( talk) 14:58, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
On a related topic, I would be interested to know what would be the outcome of an FAC, if a large portion (about 50%) of an article was split off during an FAC. Presumably, a huge split would make most of the discussion in the FAC up to that point out-of-date. Could the FAC be restarted? If the FAC is void, would the nominators be able to nominate the article again, and if so are there any guidelines on how soon? Snowman ( talk) 19:36, 19 September 2013 (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)
23:31, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi, user ViperSnake151 has withdrawn his FAC on HTC One. -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 02:02, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, there is talk on the Kosciuszko review page about adding an image. Your opinion would be appreciated. -- Gwillhickers 15:29, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Oops! I will remove the construction tag. An oversight... I've done enough damage to the article as it is. It had to be on of the toughest article I ever worked on due to a definite lack off references at covered the man's life. Cuprum17 ( talk) 23:01, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() | On 25 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Northern Area Command (RAAF), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that as Air Officer Commanding RAAF Northern Area in 1941, Frank Lukis was responsible for air defence along the entire north coast of Australia? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Northern Area Command (RAAF). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 05:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
That's standard infobox conventions / parameters, why the revert? Giant Snowman 08:39, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Oh, I must have imagined when you said "the convention I employ has been accepted in many articles at GAN, A-Class Review and FAC" then... Giant Snowman 15:04, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar |
Congratulations on your success with Bobby Gibbes. I enjoyed reading the article immeasurably and I'm happy that my vote of support counted for its well deserved promotion! Cassianto Talk 12:43, 25 September 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Bobby Gibbes. TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC) |
-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 17:17, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
Since I have a fairly good track record at FAC, I'd like to be able to nominate two articles simultaneously if I have two ready to go. Most of my normal collaborators are going to be busy for the foreseeable future and I'd like the ability to run two noms without any collaborator if necessary.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 05:25, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
I commented on the FAC for Peru national football team. The nominator, User:MarshalN20 then stalked one of my GA reviews that I asked him not to interfere with. I raised the issue at the GA discussion page, and that user became belligerent. I withdrew from the FAC and stated that my comments stand. The nominator twice removed my comments improperly from the FAC:
I have mention this and related matters at WP:AN/I#Please advise. I raise this to your attention for whatever action or sanction you may see fit.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 16:57, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, if you might be interested, it would be privilege to nominate you for adminship. Thanks. Wifione Message 18:23, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
G'day, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. I look forward to working with you over the next year. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 06:30, 29 September 2013 (UTC)
As one of a highly select international group, you are hereby invited to join me in celebrating my 666! (Let the games begin!) Pdfpdf ( talk) 11:17, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
I have nominated Albert Ball as a Featured Article candidate. Because you were a major influence on the present text, I have mentioned you on the FAR nomination page as such, with a notation that you are are being invited to become a co-nominator. I would be delighted to have you on board as such, though not at the expense of compromising your other WP duties.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 23:59, 30 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Ian,
Welcome aboard! My apologies for not thinking to ask you to give the text one last once-over. To mine eyes, it read fine. Your edits prove otherwise. I do promise you, I will not repeat this neglect if we share future FARs.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:48, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You're being contacted as you've previously used global message delivery (or its English Wikipedia counterpart). It doesn't feel so great to be spammed, does it? ;-)
For the past few months, Legoktm has built a replacement to the current message delivery system called MassMessage. MassMessage uses a proper user interface form (no more editing a /Spam subpage), works faster (it can complete a large delivery in minutes), and no longer requires being on an access list (any local administrator can use it). In addition, many tiny annoyances with the old system have been addressed. It's a real improvement! :-)
You can test out MassMessage here:
testwiki:Special:MassMessage. The biggest difference you'll likely notice is that any input list must use a new {{#target:}}
parser function. For example, {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales}}
or {{#target:User talk:Jimbo Wales|test2.wikipedia.org}}
. For detailed instructions, check out
mw:Help:Extension:MassMessage.
If you find any bugs, have suggestions for additional features, or have any other feedback, drop a note at m:Talk:MassMessage. Thanks for spamming! -- MZMcBride ( talk) 05:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | |
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I'm very pleased to award you the A-class medal with diamonds to recognise your excellent work in developing the Gordon Steege, Frank Headlam and No. 36 Squadron RAAF to A-class status. This makes you only the second person to ever receive this award. Nick-D ( talk) 10:46, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The Writer's Barnstar | |
For placing second in the June 2013 Military History Article Writing Contest with 121 points from 17 entries, I am delighted to present you with The Writer's Barnstar. Well done! Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 11:17, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Ian Rose for his fine efforts in the September 2013 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 61 points from seven articles. Well done! Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 11:21, 1 October 2013 (UTC) |
And all I did was invite you to share the celebration of my anniversary. Clearly, totally inadequate!
What can I say? Ah!! I know: "It may have taken a few years, but clearly, others, too, are now starting/continuing to acknowledge your truly impressive abilities".
Pdfpdf (
talk)
12:18, 1 October 2013 (UTC) (And no, this is not just the cynical response of a grumpy old man.)
Ian, you opened this review page over three weeks ago, but haven't yet been back to start the actual review. Will you be able to commence soon? If you're not going to be able to do it, we can put it back into the GAN reviewing pool for you. Please let us know. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:41, 2 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I'm currently hitting up all the editors who reviewed Operation Tungsten at its ACR to see if they could also review it for FA status. If you have the time, I'd appreciate it if you could also post a review. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 11:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, I've raised some concerns about this editor to Graham Colm, can you view my post on his talk page? You might remember him from the Priyanka Chopra first nomination. I don't want to make Graham's talk page a battleground, but I was wondering if you think that the weight of his actions at FAC and FLC to date would be enough to ban him from contributing to the FA process? I think it's clear that he's too immature to deal with the process and that he's incapable of addressing criticism. And it's not as if he's a star FA contributor, I think his lack of basic English in his posts is proof that he's clearly had a lot of help on his articles.♦ Dr. Blofeld 16:06, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
OK, thanks. I don't want to put anybody off contributing to articles of course, and Prashant does have an enthusiasm for wikipedia and genuinely wants to improve Indian cinema articles. But I don't think FAC is for him because of his inability to deal with criticism and opposition and it isn't fair on the people who bother to review his articles and have to put up with his accusations and silly behaviour on talk pages.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:26, 5 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks Graham for the response. Well, Prashant appears to have begun a course at a university so is unlikely to be anywhere near as active as he was on here. Perhaps he'll mature in university. If he's going to be largely inactive then I don't think its worth the trouble to try to get consensus on the matter. But seeing his further recent remarks and disruptive reverting of the list [4] perhaps it's for his own good that he's banned. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:51, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
Why are you doing this Blofeld? I thought were good hearted. But, you are trying to get me blocked. So that you can take over my flc. Huh? It's very painful. Also don't you think you are over reacting and presenting a story by adding spices. FYI, I was calmly addressing all comments and got 4 supports. Then, one oppose came and you started to show that your version was better and article was yours. Then, I got angry over you not those reviewers. You only tells one side of the story, which is very bad to do. Try to be be a honest man first. You're my idol on Wikipedia and you'll always will. let put aside our tiff and become friends and you are right I'll not be active like begor as I have started my university life, also my English is improving (I'm an engineering student). I'm also improving as a person and surely will be mature enough to deal with all kind of pressures here and in my life too. Thanks.— Prashant 19:13, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
I'm being as honest as I possibly can. Your further actions this evening which include disruptive reverting and edit summaries attacking other editors over the list and then proceeding to "strongly oppose" an article I'm involved with at FAC with no real justification for doing so on top of the way you've already acted with the Chopra article and list clearly states that you're too immature to deal with the difficulties that FAC throws at you. I'm not suggesting a block of you from editing wikipedia, just a banning from the process of FA in which you've repeatedly shown yourself to be disruptive and unable to learn from your mistakes. Your anger is uncontrollable and it isn't fair on other editors who contribute there in good faith. Anyway let's not continue this here, I'll be opening an RFC on you tomorrow.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks. OK I will postpone it for now, but I've already given him about 5 chances to stop behaving like this. Given that he's repeatedly shown himself unable to learn from his mistakes, I'm certain that he'll continue to act like this. I don't know how long it will take before he's mature enough to not react in this way to people and understand that wikipedia isn't a personal competition. He's only 19, but even for that age his level of maturity is well below average. He admits to Rambling Man that he has anger issues and personal problems but that isn't an excuse for taking out his problems on here. Perhaps the block will shock him and he'll think twice about doing this sort of thing again. But if I see one instance of disruption at FAC again from him and incivility towards contributors then there really is no alternative but to ban him from the process.♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:53, 10 October 2013 (UTC)♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:32, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
Yes, I think he needs to be blocked indefinitely until he convince us that he's over his personal problems as if he isn't blocked now he'll continue to dig a deeper hole for himself. But be wary of him. He can issue can apology and then within minutes do something completely the opposite. I think he needs to learn a lesson that he can't act like this here and get away with it. He's been almost entirely disruptive the last few weeks on here aside from addressing the FLC comments.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:58, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of George Jones (RAAF officer) know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on October 26, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite ( talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 26, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
George Jones (1896–1992) was a senior commander in the Royal Australian Air Force (RAAF). He served as Chief of the Air Staff from 1942 to 1952, the longest continuous tenure of any RAAF chief. During World War I, Jones fought as an infantryman at Gallipoli before transferring to the Australian Flying Corps. Posted to a fighter squadron in France, he achieved seven victories to become an ace, and was awarded the Distinguished Flying Cross. After a short spell in civilian life, he joined the newly formed RAAF in 1921, and rose steadily through training and personnel commands prior to World War II. Jones was a surprise appointee as Chief of the Air Staff, and his achievements in the position were coloured by a divisive relationship with the head of RAAF Command, Air Vice Marshal William Bostock. This was partly the result of a divided command structure, which neither man had any direct role in shaping. After World War II, Jones had overall responsibility for transforming what was then the world's fourth largest air force into a peacetime service that was also able to meet overseas commitments in Malaya and Korea. He was promoted to air marshal in 1948, and knighted in 1953. ( Full article...)
UcuchaBot ( talk) 23:02, 8 October 2013 (UTC)
Terrific article. Well deserved TFA. Silent Billy ( talk) 09:11, 26 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello Ian, just a quick question. Is it OK to create sub-pages for discussions to Wikipedia_talk:Featured_article_candidates or would it disturb some bots? I have compiled a laundry list of possible suggestions and ideas at User:GermanJoe/sandbox2 and would like to copy it over for discussion. The list is just too long and unwieldy to use the regular talkpage. GermanJoe ( talk) 13:41, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, in recognition of your dedication in reviewing 24 Military History good article nominations, peer review requests, A-Class nominations and/or Featured Article candidates during the period July to September 2013, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Well done and thanks, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 05:26, 10 October 2013 (UTC) |
Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tadeusz Kościuszko/archive1 has been open for over two months now and it still doesn't look like it's going to finish soon, as other editors keep tweaking the article. Can I nominate another article, since two months have passed, and there's little I can do to improve the stability of TK's article? Disclaimer: I am a WP:CUP participant, and I'd like to have a chance at getting one of my articles FA-ed before this years CUP ends :> PS. I intend to nominate Casimir Pulaski. -- Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 08:07, 11 October 2013 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of No. 36 Squadron RAAF to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 10:14, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, I have been reading and watching the WP article on the No. 36 Squadron RAAF for a few weeks and notice your obvious interest and work on the subject.
Reading the history section, I note that the squadron was formed on 11 March 1942. My late father joined that squadron as a flight mechanic just one month later, on 20 April 1942 and he served with it until the end of 1944. He flew and worked within Australia and between Australia and New Guinea moving supplies and troops. My brother and I recently donated a small amount of memorabilia that I had, to the RAAF Museum (three 36 squadron Christmas cards from 1943 and 1944 , a 1943 36 squadron printed 'Message to home' memo). They were pleased to receive these items and regard them as rare. There is also a photo of our dad servicing 'his' DC-3. It was Tony Moclair that suggested I contact the museum.
I thought you may be interested in our family connection to the squadron. Regards Greg. Melbourne3163 ( talk) 16:52, 15 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
I can't seem to find WP guidance on the above, and decided to call upon your vast experience. Someone has added a couple of categories on Lists of World War I flying aces to serve as lists. The problem arises that these lists never shall be complete, as non-notable aviators will never show up on them. I have marked the category/lists with that information, and added a note to the anchor page that they are incomplete. That has led to a bit of a bun fight, as another editor claims warning the reader of incompletion is vandalism!
At any rate, as I gen up replacements for these atrocities, I also wonder if you are aware of any consensus, MOS entry, etc. concerning the use of categories as lists. It seems to me this usage will spawn misinformation amongst the readers.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 17:33, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, as you probably know I'm spending a bit of time trying to reference a number of the RAAF squadron articles. I've hit a snag with No. 13 Squadron RAAF and No. 450 Squadron RAAF, both of which have information for which I can't find a ref. I have a feeling some of it might be in the official history, so I will eventually try to go through those, but I wonder if you might have a ref for some of the statements I've marked with citation needed tags? Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, If you haven't seen Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/IPhone 5S/archive2 you might want to look in - I think that it should be closed. Nick-D ( talk) 04:45, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I don't want to deal with personal attacks. Can you please take care of this for me? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:02, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Ian, this is a bit dusty and in need of expansion, but you're welcome to use or adapt it if you'd like. Nikkimaria ( talk) 21:58, 21 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian. I noticed this edit to the Albert Ball article. I saw the comment at the FAC by Dank that led to that edit. I can drop by the FAC to explain that wording, or I can restore the wording and make it clearer. I originally added the text in question here. I'm leaving this note here, as if I drop by the FAC myself I may get drawn into reviewing the article or adding the older talk page material that was discussed some years ago, and I can't really spare the time for that. I was also reminded of that e-mail I sent you at the time (this was two years ago now!) where you asked for some sources. Did you ever do anything with those? I could add those as well if I get time. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:49, 22 October 2013 (UTC)
Dropping this note back here, as I don't want to overwhelm the FAC with it. The position I'm in here Ian, is that I spent time (a lot of time) going over this with you and George on the talk page two years ago, and you were quite open to at least some of the material being added, but everyone seemed to drift away to do other things. What has changed?
I accept the fact that I never got round to adding the detail is entirely my fault, but I had in part assumed you would actually use those sources you (Ian) asked me to e-mail you. Did you ever get that e-mail two years ago? I would also have returned to this article if I had been aware that it was going to be put up for FAC, but the first I heard of it was when George dropped me a note on my talk page. I should at the time, instead of declining the proposed co-nomination, have said that there was unfinished discussion on the talk page and maybe asked for the review to be put on hold for a few days (I am used to co-nominations being sorted out before a review is started, not after it has started). But by the time I had thought of that, things had moved on. Surely I was not the only one who remembered those discussions?
I think one of the less common points of FACs is precisely to make sure that there are not unresolved issues hanging around on a talk page. Certainly when I was reviewing, one of the things I tried to remember to do was to check the talk page of the article under review for such things. <shrug> Maybe it is acceptable to leave things until after the review has concluded, I don't know. I just want to be sure that the time I invested two years ago looking up various things isn't wasted. Carcharoth ( talk) 00:53, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
The article is good now, regardless what some editors who opposed said. I can provide you good reasons to why the article couldn't pass before and why it can now. Regardless, you should pay attention to people with no knowledge of the subject. -- Lecen ( talk) 02:03, 23 October 2013 (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)
22:17, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013
by The Interior ( talk · contribs), Ocaasi ( talk · contribs)
Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved...
New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian
Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted.
New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis??
New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges
News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY
Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions
New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration
Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. -- The Interior 19:53, 27 October 2013 (UTC)
Shinano looks like it's almost ready to be promoted. Can I go ahead and nom another article?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:36, 28 October 2013 (UTC)
Thank you for your closing verse,
I think that many could do worse.
I promise this, dear Mr Rose,
my next attempt will be in prose.
Cheers, Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:00, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian, I'm just in the process of verifying the entries for the October contest and just wanted to clarify your Bobby Gibbes entry. The article history seems to show it was promoted to FA in late September, so I think it wouldn't be eligible for the October contest. Have I misinterpreted this, or did you mean to list a different article? Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 08:44, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian! I have removed Bobby Gibbes entry in the October contest tally because the upgrade from A-class to FA-class appears to have taken place in September, and the improvement was actually tallied in September contest. Did you mean to enter a different article?-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 10:40, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
There is a backstage pass coming up to be followed by an editathon in the State Library of New South Wales on 23 November. This is the first time that an Australian cultural institution has opened its doors to us in this way and will be a special opportunity because the Library is providing: one of its best rooms; its expert curators (along with their expertise and their white gloves); a newly launched website (containing new resources); and of course, items from its collection (including rare and usually unavailable material) which we can look at, learn from, and use, to improve WP articles. For example, on the chosen topic (Australia and WWI), the Library holds many diaries and manuscripts from the period.
As you can see from the Library's project page, they have connected this editathon with their own work. They have already set out a wide range of resources to make things easier for us. Please sign up on the editathon project page if you can participate either online or in person with other Wikipedians. Hope to see you there! Lankiveil ( speak to me) 12:22, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
This message has been delivered using AutoWikiBrowser to all users in Category:Wikipedians in Sydney.
![]() |
The Half Barnstar | |
On behalf of the article's future audience, I hereby award Ian Rose The Half Barnstar for collaborating with Georgejdorner on Albert Ball. Thank you for getting the article to FA class. Regards, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 07:46, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Albert Ball to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 11:11, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
The Teamwork Barnstar |
Presented to my exemplar of Wikipedianism. Albert Ball would not be a Featured Article without your efforts. Georgejdorner ( talk) 15:44, 4 November 2013 (UTC) |
Hello,
About a month ago, I nominated the article AdS/CFT correspondence for FA status. Since then, I've gotten a lot of helpful comments from other editors, and everyone has been quite supportive of the project. However, it's been a week since anyone left a comment, and I'm not sure that there will be more comments unless I recruit more people. Please let me know if there's anything I need to do to make sure the article gets the attention it needs. I wouldn't want it to be archived just because there weren't enough reviews.
Thanks. Polytope24 ( talk) 01:21, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Gday Ian. Are you comfortable with the ACR for this one being listed for closure as successful? I note its got 3 spts (counting your provisional spt). It has also been reviewed by a few other editors who have just made cmts. Been open since 24 Aug so its been around for a while. All the best. Anotherclown ( talk) 03:50, 5 November 2013 (UTC)
Hello, Ian. I've finally made it back to London after six weeks' exile. Happy to do the Nasser spot-check now or to wait till FAC, whichever you prefer. Tim riley ( talk) 18:27, 6 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
Thank you for your comments at the Nefarious: Merchant of Souls featured article candidacy, for pinging Cliftonian on the subject, and for soliciting a source check. Cliftonian has completed his review and Quadell completed the source check. Please let me know if you have any remaining concerns.
Neelix ( talk) 21:48, 10 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, Ian Rose, I hope you're doing well!
Over at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Fuck (film)/archive1, I think we're ready for closure, what do you think?
Do you think it could be closed at this time?
Thank you,
— Cirt ( talk) 23:57, 11 November 2013 (UTC)
These comments by Quadell may explain a bit more: "I don't see any further problems with the lead. It effectively summarizes the article, and provides a proverbial "hook". Yes, it does feel a bit choppy to go from one celebrity's random thought to the next loosely-related thought, but I've seen the film; it's a choppy mishmash of themes around a charged word. I don't think any accurate, brief summary could seem much more fluid than what this lead provides." So, you see, the contents of the film itself progresses in a bit of a "choppy" manner, so if the reader gets that impression from the Wikipedia article text, that means it is an accurate representation of the film itself, and that is a good thing! You see? — Cirt ( talk) 19:04, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Update: Thanks very much, Ian Rose, for your suggestion to ask John to help with some copy editing, the article looks much better for his efforts! I've addressed all the concerns he raised, and he has since commented with an additional "Support" at the FAC page. Cheers, — Cirt ( talk) 21:48, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian,
I was just wondering if you're satisfied with the recent spotchecks of this article. I believe the article is well cited, but it looks like people so far have had trouble confirming this due to the technical nature of the topic. Please let me know if there's anything I can do. Thank you. Polytope24 ( talk) 02:43, 15 November 2013 (UTC)
G'day, cobber,
If one looks at Rudolph Berthold, it becomes apparent it should be Rudolf Berthold. The redirect that switches the latter to the former should be eradicated. I know there is an instruction concerning the procedure, but darned if I can locate it. Given that you are the most brilliant admin I know, I thought I would ask if you know where that procedure can be found.
Cheers.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 16:15, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I hope you can keep this open a few days longer. I am dealing with Harries's replies to my review points but I'm involved with a few other things as well, on and offline, so it may take me a day or two. PS: I haven't forgotten the sources review. Brianboulton ( talk) 13:21, 17 November 2013 (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)
05:19, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. You're being contacted as you're listed as an EdwardsBot user.
MassMessage has been deployed to all Wikimedia wikis. For help using the new tool, please check out its help page or drop a note on Meta-Wiki.
With over 400,000 edits to Wikimedia wikis, EdwardsBot has served us well; however EdwardsBot will no longer perform local or global message delivery after December 31, 2013.
A huge thanks to Legoktm, Reedy, Aaron Schulz and everyone else who helped to get MassMessage deployed. -- MZMcBride ( talk) 02:36, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
I appreciated being recommended as a copyeditor. This recognition of my efforts by you meant more to me than most of my Barnstars. Thanks! -- John ( talk) 21:34, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi. What do you think about an article on the Pritzker Military Museum & Library's GLAM project ( /info/en/?search=Wikipedia:GLAM/Pritzker ) for a future issue of The Bugle? I don't think that many Wikipedians interested in military history know that they can use the Library's resources (which can be found at www.pritzkermilitary.org) for editing Wikipedia articles on military history topics. TeriEmbrey ( talk) 17:59, 25 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Just a quick note about a page that could qualify either as article or list (although I think it may be more in your bailiwick than mine). It's The Office (U.S. season 9), which is currently at FLC. I think Crisco has probably called it right in saying article, but before I fail the nom, can I just check he won't get advised to come back to FLC is he tries the list avenue? Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 22:58, 26 November 2013 (UTC)
After consideration of some of the reviewers comments, I feel I need to withdraw the nom for Adoptive Couple v. Baby Girl to allow it to go through a copy edit. I also dropped this same note at the other FA coordinators talk page. Thanks, GregJackP Boomer! 17:24, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Ian,
The following articles of interest to you have been listed for deletion:
Additionally, I have held in abeyance the nomination of Patrick Gordon Taylor in hopes that you might have reliable source(s) for his acedom.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:15, 27 November 2013 (UTC)
I should be able to take another look at the article tonight. Please don't close the FAC until I've had a chance to return; I've had several FACs closed in the past right before I was planning to comment again, and I want to avoid that this time. Giants2008 ( Talk) 18:43, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
Ian, it is doubtless an exceptionally minor point, but the reference to Flight Royal that you have just amended was copied directly from the cover and inner pages of the book. Whilst the ISBN reference capitalises the title, I think that the error lies in that place. Indeed, if you look at http://www.isbnsearch.org/isbn/0850594901 (which is the book I have) you will see how the title is presented on the cover. Cheers Lexysexy ( talk) 10:57, 3 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF 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
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
05:02, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
The article Gemini (2002 Tamil film) is currently a FAC. Would u like to suggest improvements? ---- Kailash29792 ( talk) 15:55, 7 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 34 Squadron RAAF 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
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
09:40, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 3 Aircraft Depot RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Anotherclown --
Anotherclown (
talk)
12:42, 8 December 2013 (UTC)
The article
No. 34 Squadron RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 34 Squadron RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Typing General --
Typing General (
talk)
06:12, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasi t | c 14:47, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
As I think it's pretty clear that Asahi will be promoted, can I nominate another article?-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 17:49, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello,
The above article seems to have no pending issues; thus, it is a candidate for closing its A Class review. As one of the reviewers, could you please take appropriate action?
Georgejdorner ( talk) 20:14, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, Yes, am a beginner (obviously), but have much enthusiasm for the page 37 Squadron and also the broader topic Lockheed C-130 Hercules in Australian service. I will have a look through the pointers you sent me and start trying to make it better. Appreciate the feedback. Trojan Historian ( talk) 19:47, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hey there, I hope this isn't rude or out of line for me to ask, but how are we looking so far over here? Do you think we hurt ourselves having three nominators?-- Sexy Kick 21:35, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
Just a final note as part of tidying up my departure.
If the assessment rubrics are to be supplemented by a check list of required usages, listing such in a public place within WP would benefit all editors. Nominating editors could actually be prepared for their assessments, and the reviewers' work load would be lessened. I realize this recommendation is too simple and commonsensical to be enacted, as it provides no opportunities for whiz-bang coding, but I thought I would mention it.
Of course, actually letting nominators know what the rules are would take all the fun out of "assessment via ambush", but the reviewers so deprived could find a dog to kick for their amusement.
Now, on a personal level, the only thing I shall miss about no longer being here in WP is you. Your geniality, common sense, and even temperament have made you a joy to know. While we have crossed swords at times, I have always had the greatest respect and admiration for your expertise.
If the assessment department ever does decide on transparency in its assessments, please drop me an email. Under those circumstances, I would be tempted to return and resume my drive to promote bios, preferably all the way to FA.
Best regards, George. Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:32, 14 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 482 Squadron RAAF 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)
22:02, 14 December 2013 (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)
00:00, 17 December 2013 (UTC)
Could you archive the FA nomination of How Brown Saw the Baseball Game? Consider it a withdrawal. Thanks in advance. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 04:49, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
"Assessment by ambush" is basically an unfair system of random requirements, for which the newbie cannot prepare. If the excuse for not codifying requirements is that they are constantly evolving, well, so are Wikipedia's articles. If the articles can be written down subject to change, so can the checklist.
Right now, the assessment system is swamped. A checklist would help alleviate that problem. Reading through the checklist would give pause to the unprepared, and delay nominations that are bound to fail until they are truly ready. The actual assessments that are nominated could be processed much more quickly. Better prepared nominations would lessen the assessors' work loads, and speed up the assessment process. Cripes, assessments might even become sort of fun.
Georgejdorner ( talk) 18:55, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hello, cobber,
Please archive the above nomination, as I am no longer working on it.
Thank you. Georgejdorner ( talk) 19:07, 19 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi Ian, the nomination of McDonnell Douglas AV-8B Harrier II has stalled. I'm wondering if you could give it a look and provide some insight to get the nomination rolling again. Regards, -- Sp33dyphil © hat ontributions 05:23, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
Since my FAC for Lieutenant Governor of New Jersey hasn't been too intensive (2 supports, and a successful image view check), and likely would be done in the next week or two, could I begin a nomination for another article ( A Song for Simeon)? Or would you prefer I wait? I do have the time to handle both.-- ColonelHenry ( talk) 17:49, 20 December 2013 (UTC)
featured articles
Thank you for quality articles, such as
Oswald Watt, and standing for the quality of featured articles in general. responsible for the best Wikipedia has to offer, for serving as
project coordinator and co-editor of its newsletter, for recognising "outstanding achievement", looking for the "profound, absurd or simply amusing" and seeing that "roads lead everywhere", - repeating: you are an
awesome Wikipedian (7 October 2010)!
The article
No. 482 Squadron RAAF you nominated as a
good article has passed
; see
Talk:No. 482 Squadron RAAF for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by
Legobot, on behalf of
Zawed --
Zawed (
talk)
07:42, 21 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
Happy Holidays | |
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:48, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
FWiW Bzuk (
talk)
19:27, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
![]() |
A very happy Christmas and New Year to you! |
![]() |
|
|
![]() I wish you a
Merry
Christmas and Happy New Year 2014!
|
Don't want to be the beggar during the holidays, but my life will get much less busier in the next few days. Can I have permission to renominate my FAC of How Brown Saw the Baseball Game? Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 02:07, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
|
Cheers, pina coladas all round! |
Damn need a few of these after a frenetic year and Xmas. Hope yours is a good one....Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 10:13, 25 December 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Ian, In case you haven't spotted it, the RAAF Airpower Development Centre has recently posted digitalised copies of the Units of the RAAF series on its website at http://airpower.airforce.gov.au/Publications/List/45/Air-Force-Publications.aspx @ AustralianRupert: I think that you might also be interested. Nick-D ( talk) 05:41, 28 December 2013 (UTC)
Ian, I left a note on AcDixon's talk page, but he hasn't been on wiki in a week or so. I know he said before that he's busy in his off-line life. I'm not sure how to proceed with the nomination. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 15:25, 29 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article
No. 486 Squadron RAAF 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)
07:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Ian. Can you put List of awards and nominations received by Megadeth on the FA candidates list and start the discussion since there's that "Please feel free to initiate the nomination" on the talk page. It's my first FA nomination and some help would be welcomed. Cheers and Happy New Year!-- Вик Ретлхед ( talk) 09:08, 31 December 2013 (UTC)