As a further note, would you like your sandbox hist merged with the main article? Since there were no intervening edits, its doable in 20 seconds, and would preserve the history in one place. Courcelles ( talk) 17:45, 6 July 2010 (UTC) reply

• Done- you'll find all your edits are now in William O'Connell Bradley's history. I didn't leave a redirect in your user space, per your request. Courcelles ( talk) 17:53, 6 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, doesn't this article become a little long for someone to make a Ga review? :S Regards Hekerui ( talk) 13:45, 14 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Any chance you could find a useable one for Edwin P. Morrow, or John L. Helm? I've been looking really hard online, but haven't been able to find anything. Thanks. Connormah ^talk 23:06, 20 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I'll look into it. By the way, nice job with the William S. Taylor image - I'd been looking for a frustrating amount of time (same with Helm). Connormah ^talk 17:54, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

By the way - I've found 2 for Morrow taken before 1923 - [1] (1922) and [2] (1920). Connormah ^talk 17:58, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I've also found one for Morehead - I saw you mentioned that the painting is the only one you could find - I've found a photograph, but it's fairly low resolution. [3] Hope this helps. Connormah ^talk 18:07, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I've now uploaded the image. I'll request that the watermark be removed at WP:GL. Cheers. Connormah ^talk 18:15, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

I was thinking the same as for the Morrow images - it's up to you. I'll keep looking for more photos of the governors and try to get the Goebel image sorted out. Connormah ^talk 19:09, 21 July 2010 (UTC) reply

Any chance there may be a photo of Richard Mentor Johnson in any books you've read through? Connormah ^talk 21:11, 22 July 2010 (UTC) reply

We are half-way through our penultimate round, and nothing is yet certain. Pool A, currently led by Sasata ( submissions) has ended up the more competitive, with three contestants ( Sasata ( submissions), Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) and TonyTheTiger ( submissions)) scoring over 500 points already. Pool B is led by Casliber ( submissions), who has also scored well over 500. The top two from each pool, as well as the next four highest scorers regardless of pool, will make it through to our final eight. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Planning has begun for the 2011 WikiCup, with open discussions concerning scoring and flags for next year's competition. Contributions to those discussions would be appreciated, especially concerning the flags, as next year's signups cannot begin until the flag issue has been resolved. Signups will hopefully open at some point in this round, with discussion about possible changing in the scoring/process opening some time afterwards.

Earlier this round, we said goodbye to Hunter Kahn ( submissions), who has bowed out to spend more time on the book he is authoring with his wife. We wish him all the best. In other news, the start of this round also saw some WikiCup awards sent out by Suomi Finland 2009 ( submissions). We appreciate his enthusiasm, and contestants are of course welcome to award each other prizes as they see fit, but rest assured that we will be sending out "official" awards at the end of the competition. If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 22:28, 31 July 2010 (UTC) reply

That's because the file is at Commons :) I'll get to it. Connormah ^talk 20:27, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Done. Connormah ^talk 20:28, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Also, it may be worth noting that I've asked User:MarmadukePercy to search for a daguerreotype of Helm - I've been searching a frustrating amount without yielding anything - hopefully he/she can find something - he/she seems to know alot of sources. Connormah ^talk 20:32, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Well, there's this engraving that is based off a daguerreotype - I doubt the daguerreotype is digitized, though. Connormah ^talk 20:43, 9 August 2010 (UTC) reply

I found and added three two book refs to the article. Schmidt, ^{MICHAEL Q.} 20:18, 22 August 2010 (UTC) reply

Thank you. Chris ( talk) 18:02, 30 August 2010 (UTC) reply

We have our final eight! The best of luck to those who remain. A bumper newsletter this week as we start our home straight.

• Pool A's winner was Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions). Awarded the top score overall this round, Sturmvogel_66 writes primarily on military history, favouring Naval warfare.
• Pool B's winner was Casliber ( submissions). Awarded the top score for featured articles this round, Casliber writes primarily on natural sciences, especially botany and ornithology.
• Pool A's close second was Sasata ( submissions). Awarded the top score for featured pictures this round, Sasata writes primarily on natural sciences, favouring mycology.
• Pool B's close second was ThinkBlue ( submissions). Awarded the top score for good articles and topics this round, ThinkBlue primarily writes content related to television and film, including 30 Rock.
• The first wildcard was TonyTheTiger ( submissions). Awarded the top score for did you knows and valued pictures this round, TonyTheTiger writes on a number of topics, including baseball, American football and Chicago.
• The second wildcard was White Shadows ( submissions). Someone who has helped the Cup behind the scenes all year, White Shadows said "I'm still in shock that I made it this far" and writes primarily on Naval warfare, especially U-boats.
• The third wildcard was Staxringold ( submissions). Awarded the top score for featured lists and topics this round, Staxringold primarily writes on sport and television, including baseball and 30 Rock.
• The fourth wildcard was William S. Saturn ( submissions). Entering the final eight only on the final day of the round, William S. Saturn writes on a number of topics, mostly related to Texas.

We say goodbye to the six who fell at the final hurdle. Geschichte ( submissions) only just missed out on a place in the final eight. Resolute ( submissions) was not far behind. Candlewicke ( submissions) was awarded top points for in the news this round. Gary King ( submissions) contributed a variety of did you know articles. Suomi Finland 2009 ( submissions) said "I'm surprised to have survived so far into the competition", but was extactic to see Finland in the semi-finals. Arsenikk ( submissions) did not score this round, but has scored highly in previous rounds. We also say goodbye to Ian Rose ( submissions), who withdrew earlier this month after spending six weeks overseas. Anyone interested in this round's results can see them here and here. Thank you to Stone ( submissions) for these.

Signups for next year's competition are now open. Planning is ongoing, with a key discussion about judges for next year open. Discussion about how next year's scoring will work is ongoing, and thoughts are more than welcome at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. Also, TonyTheTiger is compiling some information and statistics on the finalists here- the final eight are encouraged to add themselves to the list.

Our final eight will play it out for two months, after which we will know 2010's WikiCup winner, and a variety of prizes will be awarded. As ever, anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:05, 31 August 2010 (UTC) reply

I saw that you nominated the Steve Beshear article for GA in the "World History" category. It seems to me that "Politics and government" would be a better category for this GA nomination. The description in WP:GAN#POL seems more appropriate (since it specifically includes political figures), and the nomination backlog in that category is smaller than in the World History. As a currently active political figure, Steve Beshear is more a current rather than a historical subject. So I'd suggest that you move the nomination from WP:GAN#HIST to WP:GAN#POL section - I think it will get reviewed there faster too. Nsk92 ( talk) 18:11, 2 September 2010 (UTC) reply

I am trying to keep this FAC alive by adding comments on the FAC page. It is probably advisable that you respond quickly, to convince the delegates that this is still an active nomination. Brianboulton ( talk) 15:46, 5 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Have responded here. Thanks. Swliv ( talk) 19:54, 13 September 2010 (UTC) reply

see discussion page. Thanks.-- S. Rich ( talk) 15:42, 15 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello, Acdixon. You have new messages at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Paul E. Patton/archive2.
Message added 15:55, 15 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I think there are issues with overstating what the source says. See at Template_talk:Did you know#John Logan (pioneer). Mangoe ( talk) 16:21, 20 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello! Your submission of James Davidson (Kentucky) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Allen3  ^talk 23:06, 23 September 2010 (UTC) reply

We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. TonyTheTiger ( submissions) leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by Sasata ( submissions) with 1175 points. Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at Wikipedia:WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:00, 30 September 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, I am reviewing this for you. Lets work together to get this done. Cheers! Meishern ( talk) 21:46, 3 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi, the article is GA approved. After reading the whole thing twice I felt the comments I made for corrections are too insignificant compared to the entire body of work. I am exhausted, so please look at the GA tags I placed, to make sure everything is in order. I will look again when I wake up to make sure I didn't screw up somewhere. It was a pleasure working with you and I look forward to reviewing your other articles (as long as they aren't about politics. hahah!) Cheers! Meishern ( talk) 17:33, 11 October 2010 (UTC) reply

hey, it's not "edit war" i'm trying to clean that nonsense whom the other ip is insisting to push in the article. it would have been more appreciated if you told him/her that his/her late contributing is against wikipedia rules!-- 41.235.40.166 ( talk) 04:28, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply

( talk page stalker) As I mentioned on my talk page: Take your concerns about the article to the talk page and discuss them with other editors. If the dispute continues, I or other admins have no choice but to lock down the article--at least for anonymous users--for a period of time. Willking1979 ( talk) 09:55, 5 October 2010 (UTC) reply

How close are you to a Governor of Kentucky Featured/Good Topic? Looks like you're getting close from the looks of it. Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 15:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Congratulations on finding someone to do a GA review. I would do it but I'm intimidated by the article size, as I told you before :P Hekerui ( talk) 20:51, 8 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Congratulations on the pass! Hekerui ( talk) 18:00, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

That's exciting! All the best!! Hekerui ( talk) 18:46, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

User:Acdixon has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, and therefore, I've officially declared today as Acdixon's day! For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian, enjoy being the Star of the day, dear Acdixon! Peace, Rlevse 00:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC) reply A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

For a user ribbon you can use, see

— Rlevse • Talk • 00:35, 12 October 2010 (UTC) reply

• Currently swimming in freshman essays & listening to Janis Joplin - Me & Bobby McGee. Maybe I'll have some time tomorrow morning, which is probably much later this evening/night for you. wait, Janis just ended... Van Morrison, Into the Mystic... •  Ling.Nut 12:00, 14 October 2010 (UTC) reply

• I'm gonna go ahead and Pass GA. There's one sentence in the lede that I don't like (plus perhaps an error; see the GA review page). I'm still kinda hesitant about the formatting of the refs, but as long as they are consistent, I actually have no room to complain. Congrats! •  Ling.Nut 03:31, 20 October 2010 (UTC) reply

I made some comments at Wikipedia:Peer review/John J. Crittenden/archive1 - not sure if you are watching it or not. Hope all goes well (or has gonme well) with the new baby. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:48, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

You are very welcome and good luck with the article. I thought the lead was exceptionally well done. The text was generally easy to follow, though as noted, could stand to be tightened in places. Thinking about it, I wonder that there is not more on his legacy beyond the two places named for him. I wonder what the various biographies of him say. Even a paragraph on how he is seen by modern historians or even within Kentucky might help. Best wishes for you new daughter - a baby is a wonderful adventure (if an exhausting one). Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:02, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

PS FAC has been slow (dearth of reviewers) so if / when you nominate this there, let me know. I am sure the FAC reviewers will find things I missed, and I would have to reread it (and even more carefully), but I think it is pretty close already to FA standards. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:03, 25 October 2010 (UTC) reply

Look forward to seeing Crittenden at FAC. I also think shorter articles (on average) have an easier time getting reviews than longer ones (since an FAC review should be thorough). Not that the Crittenden article should be cut, but again any places that it can be tightened, even by a word or two every few sentences, would help. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:36, 26 October 2010 (UTC) reply

The article John Y. Brown, Jr. you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:John Y. Brown, Jr. for things which need to be addressed. Aaron north ( T/ C) 03:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC) reply

The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions), with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to TonyTheTiger ( submissions), with 2260, and third to Casliber ( submissions), with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists – White Shadows ( submissions), William S. Saturn ( submissions), Staxringold ( submissions) and ThinkBlue ( submissions). Also, congratulations to Sasata ( submissions), who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is Casliber ( submissions), for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions), for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is Staxringold ( submissions), for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is Jujutacular ( submissions), for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions), for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is TonyTheTiger ( submissions), for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is Candlewicke ( submissions), for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 03:00, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

		The WikiCup 2010 Ribbon of Participation
		Awarded to Acdixon, for participation in the 2010 WikiCup. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 08:55, 1 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello! As you may be aware, the Wikimedia Foundation is gearing up for our annual fundraiser. We want to hit our goal, and hit it as soon as possible, so that we can focus on Wikipedia's tenth anniversary (January 15) and on our new project, the Contribution Team.

I'm posting across User Talk pages to engage you, the community, in working to build Wikipedia not only through financial donations, but also through collaboration in building content. You can find more information in Philippe Beaudette's memo to the communities here.

Please visit the Contribution Team page and the Fundraising page to find out how you can help us support and spread free knowledge. ⇒ DanRosenthal ^{Wikipedia Contribution Team} 18:42, 15 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Acdixon, thank you for your brilliant work on the vast topic of Kentucky governors. This will be by far the largest and greatest FT Wikipedia has ever seen. With John Y. Brown, Jr., I think, as the only remaining one, I look forward to support your upcoming nomination. Before this, however, I would like to point out a few concerns so that perhaps they could be addressed prior to the nomination.

Mainly, I think that there should be consistency in header titles. The footer sections for Isaac Shelby are Notes, References, Further reading, and External links, in that order. But in James Garrard, notes have been renamed references, and references are renamed bibliography. Christopher Greenup has a Footnotes section, and the citation notes and books used are combined into References. Charles Scott (governor) calls Notes footnotes, and the order is swapped with references. I don't care which format is used (the Shelby style seems to be best and most common), but it should be consistent.

Also, some have See also sections, while others don't. Some of these only link to History of Kentucky, though others have more integral links. Again, thanks for a fantastic job so far and I can't wait to see this monumental project finished! Reywas92 ^Talk 21:31, 24 November 2010 (UTC) reply

Regarding the edit you reverted, I spent all afternoon using those headings for the 61 Kentucky governor articles that will comprise a good topic (GT) once John Y. Brown, Jr. passes GA. This is a place where conventions clash, I suppose, but in the interest of keeping SBB consistent with the others, would it be OK to change it back? Acdixon ^{( talk • contribs • count)} 20:52, 15 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Sure. I didn't know what you were up to. If you have consistency in one dimension of articles (Govs), that can trump another dimension (ACW) if you feel strongly about it. Thanks for discussing. That being said, if you are going to use a Bibliography heading, you should consider folding in the entries from Further Reading. In the (well-developed) ACW articles, there is specific usage prescribed for each of the standard headings, as described in User:Hlj/CWediting#Refs and Links, but if you are not using that standard, the Bibliography should probably cover all books, not simply those that are cited. Hal Jespersen ( talk) 02:01, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Thanks for understanding. I kind of developed this system on my own. It's tough to get refs, sources cited, useful sources that were not cited, explanatory notes, see also links, and external links in some kind of consistent format; this seemed to work best for me across all the governor articles. Every time one of them went through a GA or FA nom, someone had a different system they wanted to impose before passing the article. I finally just went back and standardized with this. I wish there was some consistency across Wikipedia, but I'm sure we'd never get folks to agree! Acdixon ^{( talk • contribs • count)} 12:44, 16 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Hi! I've been on hiatus from Wikipedia for awhile now, as I've had some major life changes occur. I received an E-Mail regarding the phrasing differences between "shadow" and "provisional" government as it applies to the article. I recognize that you did most of the authoring, so I'm letting you know I've weighed in on the subject. I am in favor of changing the term to provisional. I hope you had a great Christmas and have an even better New Year's! -- Steven Williamson ( HiB2Bornot2B) - talk ▓▒░ Go Big Blue! ░▒▓ 22:22, 28 December 2010 (UTC) reply

Hello. You are being contacted because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup but have not yet signed up for the 2011 WikiCup, which starts at midnight. It is not too late to sign up! The competition will remain open until at least January 31, and so it is not too late to enter. If you are interested, simply follow the instructions to add your username to the signup page, and a judge will contact you as soon as possible with an explanation of how to participate. The WikiCup is a friendly competition open to all Wikipedians, old and new, experienced and inexperienced, providing a fun and rewarding way to contribute quality content to Wikipedia. If you do not want to receive any further messages about the WikiCup, or you want to start receiving messages about the WikiCup, you may add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. If you have any questions, feel free to ask on the WikiCup talk page or contact the judges directly. J Milburn and The ed17 06:45, 31 December 2010 (UTC) reply