The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)reply
GA Units
Thanks Ed. I'd appreciate any help you can give me. I'm working on
11th Airborne Division at the moment, so any help you can give there would be great. Cheers!
Skinny87 (
talk) 19:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Good job on that one. Are there any others that you need help with? -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 22:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11)
The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the
GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions.
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
Giggy (
talk·contribs) (a.k.a.
Dihydrogen Monoxide (
talk·contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
New GA Review Process - Review Subpages
In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{
GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable.
When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at
WP:GAN in the appropriate category.
When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{
GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the
Good Article criteria, as well as to the
Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the
mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be
transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{
ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter.
Delivered by the automated
Giggabot (
stop!) 01:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Image tagging for Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 18:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Re: GA's
To be honest with you, I don't know exactly in what category is supposed to go under, I mean, I know it goes under "World history", but not sure what category though. That's why its not at the Good article page. For the future, where exactly does it go on? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE) 22:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I was going for that section, but I wasn't 100% sure. Thanks for letting me know and sorry if I caused any hassle for the articles. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE) 22:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
You have just slapped a refimprove template on This Must Be the Place, an album included in WikiPojects Albums, and I'm not quite sure why. The article contains no material whatsoever that can be considered a quote or material likely to be challenged, which is what Wikipedia's verifiability policy refers to when requiring references. It contains an infobox, a track listing and personnel. Are you doubting the existence of the album itself, or is the notability that you are questioning? --
Technopat (
talk) 21:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Yes. The page is currently very small, but all the information on it (other than the track listing and other permiteerd by
WP:CITE) should be sourced since there are currently no references at all on it. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your reply. But we're back at square one. There are no references because there is no information on it other than what you yourself refer to. --
Technopat (
talk) 23:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)reply
The tag is there more to show an area that could be improved, rather than a current problem with the article. The information may not be disputed, but since there are absolutely no references at all, it should at least have citations that point to its publishing and/or information about the article online or in print. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 20:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)reply
1st Sustainment Brigade
Hey man, sorry about taking a while to get back to you. I just got back from one trip and I have a day to pack for the second one, so I should probably remove that tag. If nothing's happened when I get back on the 19th, I'll do it then. All the best,
Cam (
Chat) 04:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)reply
It's all right, someone else has already begun to review the article. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 20:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)reply
By order of the coordinators, for your fine work tagging and assessing military history articles in
Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you with this Tireless Contributor's barnstar. --
ROGER DAVIEStalk 09:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thank you very much indeed for your help with and commitment to the drive. May I please trouble you to comment at the
post-drive workshop? Your feedback will help us to improve the next drive. Thanks in advance, --
ROGER DAVIEStalk 09:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Disambiguator
I don't know if you saw the talk page for the Milhist project. I started a discussion on it. The discussion will explain my motive a bit more. Also note that no AF unit has the disambiguator. When you did that, you broke links to the A-Class review and it is now active and being discussed.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 20:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
1st Armored Division (United States)
Ooops! Ed you're right! I was so much looking for a better quality image than the one used, that I overlooked the writing! I changed it back and as there is no better quality SSI of the 1st AD I will just sit down and create one today. thanks for pointing out the embarrassing "slip of the pen". --
noclador (
talk) 07:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Question: Do the Armored Divisions beyond the 3rd have their nicknames on the SSIs too? or do they have just the number? looking at
Category:Armored_divisions_of_the_United_States_Army it seems that only the first 3 Divs have the name in the SSI and all the other don't... can you clarify this issue for me??? as soon as I know, I will do all the remaining SSI of all the Armored Divs. --
noclador (
talk) 13:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Many of them do. I'm not sure how official this practice was though.
4th - Breakthrough
5th - Victory
6th - Super Sixth
7th - Lucky Seventh
8th - Thundering Herd / Iron Snake
9th - Phantom / Remagen
10th - Tiger
11th - Thunderbolt
12th - Speed Is the Password
13th - Black Cats
14th - Liberators
30th - Dixie
49th - Lone Star
50th - Jersey Blues
Thanks for the WikiChevrons Ed :-) Seeing my creations online is already a great satisfaction, but having the work then recognized too brings more joy and much refreshed vigor to create even more graphics :-) thanks again, and if there is some graphics you need: Just tell me :-) --
noclador (
talk) 13:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry about the delay.
AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter!
Dr. Cash (
talk) 20:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,675 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 141 unreviewed articles. Out of 186 total nominations, 28 are on hold, 14 are under review, and 3 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film, and drama (28 articles), Sports and recreation (27 articles), Music (22 articles), Transport (18 articles), and War and military (13 articles).
There are currently 4 articles up for re-review at
Good Article Reassessment. Congratulations! There really is no "backlog" here! :-)
GA Sweeps is Recruiting Reviewers
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
ThinkBlue (
talk·contribs) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for July, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. ThinkBlue had a whopping 49 reviews during the month of July! ThinkBlue was also one of our two reviewers of the month from June, and has been editing Wikipedia since
December 1,
2006, and is interested in articles dealing with
Friends,
Will and Grace,
CSI:Miami,
Monday Night Raw,
Coldplay.
Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of July include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
GA Sweeps Process
The GA Sweeps process has recently reached its first year anniversary. If you are unaware of what GA Sweeps is, it is a process put in place to help ensure the integrity of the ever-growing number of GAs, by determining if the articles still meet the
GA criteria. Experienced reviewers check each article, improving articles as they review them, and delisting those that no longer meet the criteria. Reviewers work on a specific
category of GAs, and there are still many categories that need to be swept. In order to properly keep track of reviews, a
set date was used to determine what articles needed to be reviewed (since any future GAs would be passed according to the most recent GA criteria).
The number of GAs that were to be reviewed totals 2,808. Since the beginning of Sweeps, the progress has reviewed 981 by the end of July 2008 (or exempted them). For a table and chart breakdown of the current progress, see
here.
With more than twenty editors reviewing the articles, progress is currently a third of the way done. At this rate, it will take another two years to complete the Sweeps, and active involvement is imperative to completing on time. We are always looking for new reviewers, and if you are interested in helping in speeding up the Sweeps process and improving your reviewing skills, please contact
OhanaUnited.
Did You Know...
... that the goal of GA Sweeps is to reviewed all articles listed before
26 August2007?
... that the entire category of, "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" has been swept?
... that of all subcategories, "Recordings, compositions and performances" in the Music category has the most articles (240 articles in total)?
This is an automated message from
CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of
360th Civil Affairs Brigade (United States), and it appears to include a substantial copy of
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/360ca-bde.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on
the maintainer's talk page.
CorenSearchBot (
talk) 17:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)reply
A tag has been placed on
360th Civil Affairs Brigade (United States) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under
section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant
copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the
GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question
here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}} to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --
Collectonian (
talk·contribs) 00:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Altogether foolish move entirely. I didn't even get the chance to remove the copyrighted material, and by swatting the fly with a sledgehammer, the article, much of which was NOT copied, must be recreated. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 02:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)reply
G'day Ed. I was rewriting the article on the 41st Infantry Division in my sandbox when someone came along and moved it. My intention was that this would replace the old article. I'll get cracking on it.
Hawkeye7 (
talk) 02:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I will do it on Saturday - I would do it immediately, but I'm away from my PC and won't get back to all my graphic files until Friday night. As soon as I'm home I will make and upload the new graphic (easy work - just a number needs to be changed), any other graphics you need - I have time this weekend ;-) --
noclador (
talk) 08:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Excellet! For now that's all I can think of, unless you want to consider converting some of the SSI from the
Brigade Insignia of the United States Army page (something that the Institute of Heraldry seems to be doing at a slow pace) -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 15:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
You recently tagged
List of Jamaicans with {{
Refimprove}}. However the article is simply a list of names, most of which are links to articles about the individual listed. Any references will be in those articles. Are you sure it is necessary to cite all those references here as well? While I am not aware of any guideline on the topic, if memory serves, other similar lists do not cite references. If it is the red links you have concerns about then a more accurate approach would be to tag with {{
Fact}} each of these (there are only a few).
-Arb. (
talk) 14:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I tagged it because, per
Wikipedia:Lists#List_Content, the article still falls under the
Verifiability policy. Since there are zero references on the page, I feel that it should be improved with references linking each name with Jamacia. Since many of the names are redlinked (and many of the bluelinked ones aren't sourced) I just put the template up that the whole thing needed references. This is simply a suggestion for improvement on my part. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 15:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)
The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 00:30, 3 June 2008 (UTC)reply
GA Units
Thanks Ed. I'd appreciate any help you can give me. I'm working on
11th Airborne Division at the moment, so any help you can give there would be great. Cheers!
Skinny87 (
talk) 19:57, 4 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Good job on that one. Are there any others that you need help with? -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 22:01, 18 June 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,266 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 157 unreviewed articles. Out of 215 total nominations, 44 are on hold, 13 are under review, and one is seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film and drama (31), Sports and recreation (31), Transport (24), Music (13), and Art and architecture (11)
The GA Sweeps process is progressing nicely! During the month of May, a total of 82 articles were reviewed. Of that total, 71 were found to continue to meet the
GA criteria, and 11 were delisted. There are currently 15 articles that are still on hold in this process, awaiting revisions.
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
Giggy (
talk·contribs) (a.k.a.
Dihydrogen Monoxide (
talk·contribs)) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for May, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. Giggy had a whopping 45 reviews during the month of May! Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of May include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
New GA Review Process - Review Subpages
In case you haven't noticed, we initiated a new process for GA Reviews at the end of last month. The {{
GA nominee}} template was modified to direct new reviews initiated on an article to begin on a subpage of article talkspace (e.g. [[Talk:Article/GA#]], where '#' is the current number of GA reviews conducted for the article, incremented automatically, starting with 1). The primary reason for this change is to address some concerns made by several Wikipedians that previous GA reviews are not easily accessible in archives, the way that featured article reviews and peer reviews are, since the review is conducted on the article's talkspace, instead of in a subpage of the featured article space or peer review space. The reason we opted to move GA reviews to article talkspace (instead of GA space) is to better maintain the personal relationship between editor(s) and reviewer(s) by keeping reviews done in an area where editors can easily access it. Nonetheless, we still desired to have better archiving and maintenance of past reviews, so that GA ultimately becomes more accountable.
When an article is nominated, the nominator adds the template using a substitution, by adding {{subst:GAN|subtopic=<name of subtopic for article at GAN>}}, as well as lists the article (as usual) at
WP:GAN in the appropriate category.
When a reviewer initiates a review of an article, all that needs to be done is to read the template on the article's {{
GA nominee}} template on its talk page, and click on the link to start the review. When the reviewer clicks on that link, they will also see some instructions on how to start a review of a GAN. For new reviewers, there's also a link to the
Good Article criteria, as well as to the
Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles page and the
mentors list. Once an article is reviewed, the GA review page should be
transcluded onto the main article talk page, by adding {{Talk:Article/GA#}} to the bottom of the talk page. This is to ensure maintain the transparency of the GA process, as well as to make editors of the article in question aware that the review is taking place. When an article is either passed or failed, there's really nothing different to do in the process, although reviewers are encouraged to utilize the {{
ArticleHistory}} template, linking to the GA review subpage with the 'action#link' parameter.
Delivered by the automated
Giggabot (
stop!) 01:27, 9 June 2008 (UTC)reply
Image tagging for Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
Thanks for uploading Image:174InfBdeDUI.jpg. You don't seem to have said where the image came from or who created it. We require this information to verify that the image is legally usable on Wikipedia, and because most image licenses require giving credit to the image's creator.
To add this information, click on
this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the information to the image's description. If you need help, post your question on
Wikipedia:Media copyright questions.
For more information on using images, see the following pages:
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVIII (June 2008)
The June 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 18:35, 5 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Re: GA's
To be honest with you, I don't know exactly in what category is supposed to go under, I mean, I know it goes under "World history", but not sure what category though. That's why its not at the Good article page. For the future, where exactly does it go on? -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE) 22:05, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
I was going for that section, but I wasn't 100% sure. Thanks for letting me know and sorry if I caused any hassle for the articles. -- ThinkBlue (HitBLUE) 22:15, 7 July 2008 (UTC)reply
You have just slapped a refimprove template on This Must Be the Place, an album included in WikiPojects Albums, and I'm not quite sure why. The article contains no material whatsoever that can be considered a quote or material likely to be challenged, which is what Wikipedia's verifiability policy refers to when requiring references. It contains an infobox, a track listing and personnel. Are you doubting the existence of the album itself, or is the notability that you are questioning? --
Technopat (
talk) 21:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Yes. The page is currently very small, but all the information on it (other than the track listing and other permiteerd by
WP:CITE) should be sourced since there are currently no references at all on it. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 16:37, 12 July 2008 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your reply. But we're back at square one. There are no references because there is no information on it other than what you yourself refer to. --
Technopat (
talk) 23:41, 13 July 2008 (UTC)reply
The tag is there more to show an area that could be improved, rather than a current problem with the article. The information may not be disputed, but since there are absolutely no references at all, it should at least have citations that point to its publishing and/or information about the article online or in print. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 20:44, 16 July 2008 (UTC)reply
1st Sustainment Brigade
Hey man, sorry about taking a while to get back to you. I just got back from one trip and I have a day to pack for the second one, so I should probably remove that tag. If nothing's happened when I get back on the 19th, I'll do it then. All the best,
Cam (
Chat) 04:49, 13 July 2008 (UTC)reply
It's all right, someone else has already begun to review the article. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 20:43, 16 July 2008 (UTC)reply
By order of the coordinators, for your fine work tagging and assessing military history articles in
Tag & Assess 2008, I hereby award you with this Tireless Contributor's barnstar. --
ROGER DAVIEStalk 09:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Thank you very much indeed for your help with and commitment to the drive. May I please trouble you to comment at the
post-drive workshop? Your feedback will help us to improve the next drive. Thanks in advance, --
ROGER DAVIEStalk 09:49, 1 August 2008 (UTC)reply
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXIX (July 2008)
The July 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by
BrownBot (
talk) 01:05, 3 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Disambiguator
I don't know if you saw the talk page for the Milhist project. I started a discussion on it. The discussion will explain my motive a bit more. Also note that no AF unit has the disambiguator. When you did that, you broke links to the A-Class review and it is now active and being discussed.
Kevin Rutherford (
talk) 20:01, 11 August 2008 (UTC)reply
1st Armored Division (United States)
Ooops! Ed you're right! I was so much looking for a better quality image than the one used, that I overlooked the writing! I changed it back and as there is no better quality SSI of the 1st AD I will just sit down and create one today. thanks for pointing out the embarrassing "slip of the pen". --
noclador (
talk) 07:39, 16 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Question: Do the Armored Divisions beyond the 3rd have their nicknames on the SSIs too? or do they have just the number? looking at
Category:Armored_divisions_of_the_United_States_Army it seems that only the first 3 Divs have the name in the SSI and all the other don't... can you clarify this issue for me??? as soon as I know, I will do all the remaining SSI of all the Armored Divs. --
noclador (
talk) 13:44, 16 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Many of them do. I'm not sure how official this practice was though.
4th - Breakthrough
5th - Victory
6th - Super Sixth
7th - Lucky Seventh
8th - Thundering Herd / Iron Snake
9th - Phantom / Remagen
10th - Tiger
11th - Thunderbolt
12th - Speed Is the Password
13th - Black Cats
14th - Liberators
30th - Dixie
49th - Lone Star
50th - Jersey Blues
Thanks for the WikiChevrons Ed :-) Seeing my creations online is already a great satisfaction, but having the work then recognized too brings more joy and much refreshed vigor to create even more graphics :-) thanks again, and if there is some graphics you need: Just tell me :-) --
noclador (
talk) 13:18, 18 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Sorry about the delay.
AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter!
Dr. Cash (
talk) 20:31, 19 August 2008 (UTC)reply
There are currently 4,675 Good Articles listed at
WP:GA.
The backlog at
Good Article Nominations is 141 unreviewed articles. Out of 186 total nominations, 28 are on hold, 14 are under review, and 3 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to
WP:GAN and review an article or three as soon as you have a chance!
The categories with the largest backlogs are: Theatre, film, and drama (28 articles), Sports and recreation (27 articles), Music (22 articles), Transport (18 articles), and War and military (13 articles).
There are currently 4 articles up for re-review at
Good Article Reassessment. Congratulations! There really is no "backlog" here! :-)
GA Sweeps is Recruiting Reviewers
We are once again recruiting new sweeps participants. Candidates should be very strong and comfortable in reviewing GA and familiar with the GA processes and
criteria. If you are interested, please contact
OhanaUnited for details.
GAN Reviewer of the Month
ThinkBlue (
talk·contribs) is the GAN Reviewer of the Month for July, based on the assessments made by
Dr. Cash on the number and thoroughness of the reviews made by individual reviewers each week. ThinkBlue had a whopping 49 reviews during the month of July! ThinkBlue was also one of our two reviewers of the month from June, and has been editing Wikipedia since
December 1,
2006, and is interested in articles dealing with
Friends,
Will and Grace,
CSI:Miami,
Monday Night Raw,
Coldplay.
Congratulations to
Giggy (
talk·contribs) on being May's GAN Reviewer of the Month!
Other outstanding reviewers during the month of July include:
This WikiProject, and the
Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!
GA Sweeps Process
The GA Sweeps process has recently reached its first year anniversary. If you are unaware of what GA Sweeps is, it is a process put in place to help ensure the integrity of the ever-growing number of GAs, by determining if the articles still meet the
GA criteria. Experienced reviewers check each article, improving articles as they review them, and delisting those that no longer meet the criteria. Reviewers work on a specific
category of GAs, and there are still many categories that need to be swept. In order to properly keep track of reviews, a
set date was used to determine what articles needed to be reviewed (since any future GAs would be passed according to the most recent GA criteria).
The number of GAs that were to be reviewed totals 2,808. Since the beginning of Sweeps, the progress has reviewed 981 by the end of July 2008 (or exempted them). For a table and chart breakdown of the current progress, see
here.
With more than twenty editors reviewing the articles, progress is currently a third of the way done. At this rate, it will take another two years to complete the Sweeps, and active involvement is imperative to completing on time. We are always looking for new reviewers, and if you are interested in helping in speeding up the Sweeps process and improving your reviewing skills, please contact
OhanaUnited.
Did You Know...
... that the goal of GA Sweeps is to reviewed all articles listed before
26 August2007?
... that the entire category of, "Meteorology and atmospheric sciences" has been swept?
... that of all subcategories, "Recordings, compositions and performances" in the Music category has the most articles (240 articles in total)?
This is an automated message from
CorenSearchBot. I have performed a web search with the contents of
360th Civil Affairs Brigade (United States), and it appears to include a substantial copy of
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/army/360ca-bde.htm. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material; such additions will be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences.
This message was placed automatically, and it is possible that the bot is confused and found similarity where none actually exists. If that is the case, you can remove the tag from the article and it would be appreciated if you could drop a note on
the maintainer's talk page.
CorenSearchBot (
talk) 17:51, 22 August 2008 (UTC)reply
A tag has been placed on
360th Civil Affairs Brigade (United States) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under
section G12 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be a blatant
copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted text or images borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. You may use external websites as a source of information, but not as a source of sentences. This part is crucial: say it in your own words.
If the external website belongs to you, and you want to allow Wikipedia to use the text — which means allowing other people to modify it — then you must include on the external site the statement "I, (name), am the author of this article, (article name), and I release its content under the terms of the
GNU Free Documentation License, Version 1.2 and later." You might want to look at
Wikipedia's policies and guidelines for more details, or ask a question
here.
If you think that this notice was placed here in error, you may contest the deletion by adding {{
hangon}} to the top of
the page that has been nominated for deletion (just below the existing speedy deletion or "db" tag), coupled with adding a note on the talk page explaining your position, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the article meets the criterion it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the article that would would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. --
Collectonian (
talk·contribs) 00:39, 23 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Altogether foolish move entirely. I didn't even get the chance to remove the copyrighted material, and by swatting the fly with a sledgehammer, the article, much of which was NOT copied, must be recreated. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 02:28, 23 August 2008 (UTC)reply
G'day Ed. I was rewriting the article on the 41st Infantry Division in my sandbox when someone came along and moved it. My intention was that this would replace the old article. I'll get cracking on it.
Hawkeye7 (
talk) 02:46, 27 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I will do it on Saturday - I would do it immediately, but I'm away from my PC and won't get back to all my graphic files until Friday night. As soon as I'm home I will make and upload the new graphic (easy work - just a number needs to be changed), any other graphics you need - I have time this weekend ;-) --
noclador (
talk) 08:05, 27 August 2008 (UTC)reply
Excellet! For now that's all I can think of, unless you want to consider converting some of the SSI from the
Brigade Insignia of the United States Army page (something that the Institute of Heraldry seems to be doing at a slow pace) -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 15:47, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
You recently tagged
List of Jamaicans with {{
Refimprove}}. However the article is simply a list of names, most of which are links to articles about the individual listed. Any references will be in those articles. Are you sure it is necessary to cite all those references here as well? While I am not aware of any guideline on the topic, if memory serves, other similar lists do not cite references. If it is the red links you have concerns about then a more accurate approach would be to tag with {{
Fact}} each of these (there are only a few).
-Arb. (
talk) 14:48, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
I tagged it because, per
Wikipedia:Lists#List_Content, the article still falls under the
Verifiability policy. Since there are zero references on the page, I feel that it should be improved with references linking each name with Jamacia. Since many of the names are redlinked (and many of the bluelinked ones aren't sourced) I just put the template up that the whole thing needed references. This is simply a suggestion for improvement on my part. -Ed!(talk)(Hall of Fame) 15:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)reply
