This page is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archives:

2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015 · 2016 · 2017 · 2018 · 2019 · 2020 · 2021 · 2022 · 2023 · 2024

	Happy New Year 2016!
	Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels? Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unneccessary blisters.    – Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Spread the WikiLove; use {{ subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

Hawkeye7,

Hope you had a good New year. Recently, you assessed the George Grimson article as "C-class", but yet it remains a "stub-class" article. Adamdaley ( talk) 23:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

• ( talk page stalker) FWIW I've now added the MILHIST banner and assessed as C class. Anotherclown ( talk) 23:44, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

  Thanks for that! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:44, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Jacob L. Devers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jacob L. Devers for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek ( talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

On 6 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Arthur V. Peterson, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Major Arthur V. Peterson traveled to Europe before D-Day to warn General Eisenhower about the dangers of the Germans using radioactive weapons? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Arthur V. Peterson. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, live views, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Seth Neddermeyer 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 Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 05:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

WP:NOPIPE and WP:NOTBROKEN aside, a redirect in a navbox is broken, as it does not display correctly on the target page. The link is supposed to be a bold 'non-link' on the page in question - if the link is a redirect, it doesn't do that, but instead is still is an active link, making it look like there is a different page for the subject. - The Bushranger _{One ping only} 10:59, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

But... I am looking at it, and it does wok that way. I have put it back. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 4 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts! AustralianRupert ( talk) 02:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Seth Neddermeyer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Seth Neddermeyer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 04:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Request to revisit the discussion. North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 06:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

On 12 January 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Norman Hilberry, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the start up of Chicago Pile-1, Norman Hilberry stood ready with an ax to cut the scram line? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Norman Hilberry. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

The article Chicago Pile-1 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chicago Pile-1 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

17:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article X-10 Graphite Reactor 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 Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 07:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

The article X-10 Graphite Reactor you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:X-10 Graphite Reactor for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 08:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

The article X-10 Graphite Reactor you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:X-10 Graphite Reactor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 22:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

I refer to this RV. "commenced construction of the plutonium semiworks, codenamed X-10" or "[X-10] was the world's second artificial nuclear reactor". The lede bounces back and forth. I don't believe the chemical extraction side was referred to as X-10, and since that is definitely part of the semi works then my edit was correct, or the rest of the lede is wrong. So which is it? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 20:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

The first one is right. X-10 was the codename for the plutonium semiworks, of which the reactor was part. So what do we have?

"The X-10 Graphite Reactor was the world's second artificial nuclear reactor"

"In September 1942, Compton asked a physicist, Martin D. Whitaker, to form a skeleton operating staff for X-10"

"By March 1944, there were some 1,500 people working at X-10"

"Exterior of the Graphite Reactor at the X-10 site"

"the cost of construction at X-10" (Clear here that we are talking about the entire facility)

"X-10 operated as a plutonium production plant until January 1945"

"X-10 supplied the Los Alamos Laboratory with the first significant samples of plutonium"

"The X-10 chemical separation plant"

"The X-10 Graphite Reactor was shut down on November 4, 1963"

"One reactor of similar design to the X-10 Graphite Reactor is still in operation today"

I think the wording is consistent. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:03, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

So the chemical plant beside the reactor is also known as "the X-10 Graphite Reactor"? Maury Markowitz ( talk) 23:23, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

No, it is the "X-10 chemical separation plant". (Am I missing something here?) Hawkeye7 ( talk) 04:09, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

I think it would be good if you would voice your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 20. Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 07:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

G'day Hawkeye, I've been trying to reference the Salamaua–Lae campaign article this weekend, but have come up blank with the base development information in the Aftermath section of the article. Given the sources you were able to bring to the Battle of Milne Bay article, I was wondering if you might be able to check your library to see if you can add the last couple of references. Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 08:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Looks like I wrote it back in March 2007. I know where it all comes from. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 10:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Great! Thanks. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

 Done Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

HJ Mitchell would like to nominate you to become an administrator. Please visit Wikipedia:Requests for adminship to see what this process entails, and then contact HJ Mitchell to accept or decline the nomination. A page has been created for your nomination at Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hawkeye7. If you accept the nomination, you must state and sign your acceptance. You may also choose to make a statement and/or answer the optional questions to supplement the information your nominator has given. Once you are satisfied with the page, you may post your nomination for discussion, or request that your nominator do so.

—Ready whenever you are. Don't feel any need to rush. And good luck. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

16:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

This is a very special beer. It refills daily for those in the midst of a request of adminship. Cheers! MurderByDeletionism "bang!" 18:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Just what I've always wanted! Thank you! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

[25] I'm assuming you didn't actually memorize Russian poetry by a small Iranian village. But notifying you, just in case you actually did. (I guess there could have been an anonymous Russian poet known only for living there, so becoming known by...) -- GRuban ( talk) 22:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. In the wake of the Vietnam War, the educational authorities decided that the Cold War was lost, and that we should all learn Russian. I found it a difficult subject, not least because I missed a term as a result of a surgical operation. You could pass by passing the exam, or by memorising and reciting a Pushkin poem. So that's what we did. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:49, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Jefferson Davis; Hawkeye7 on Australia's war in Vietnam Op-ed: TomStar81 discusses British World War I conscription Timeline: This month in World War I

Congratulation Hawkeye7, you're gonna be an admin! ( N0n3up ( talk) 04:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC))

It's not over yet. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:07, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

I've opposed your bid to become an admin, with a degree of regret and awkwardness. My best to you all the same. Tony (talk) 13:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry here, too, for not voting, but I won't be voting in any 2016 RfAs because of my work with relevant RfCs. (I suspect we'll be seeing several more big ones this year.) Best of luck, Hawkeye (and Tony, good to see you here). - Dank ( push to talk) 16:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Dan. One thing that is worth a second look is what bits are needed for ArbCom. There was a couple of hasty RfCs when it was thought that I might win a seat; but it looks now like it has been shelved until next year. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I've considered closing RfCs related to Arbcom, mostly because what Arbcom does and doesn't do has a big impact on RfA (as you may have recently noticed). But I'm probably out of my depth there. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

diff | hist) . . Bill Mauldin; 22:40 . . (-2) . . Hawkeye7 (talk | contribs) (Have their own article now)

For shame, for shame! Anmccaff ( talk) 23:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sadly I don't have the time to review the article in a way that would do it justice, but congrats on tackling it looks fantastic. -- Errant ^{( chat!)} 11:03, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I was proud to support your RfA. Collect ( talk) 21:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Per your inquiry, the answer was probably in part here. But I'll be trying again, probably next spring or so...maybe summer, probably after the Belmont Stakes and the flurry of horse article editing surrounding the triple crown races concludes. I'd most certainly by interested in your input on how I might do a better job next time or if there are ways I could handle things better. Montanabw ^(talk) 23:04, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

I am in total agreement with the above sentiments. It was my pleasure to support your candidacy. I don't quite understand the process or why things work out the way they do, but I tend to believe that timing has a lot to do with it. Atsme ^{📞 📧} 23:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Congrats! Ditto on Collect's comment. I still think you'd be a good arb - go for it next year. Smallbones_{( smalltalk)} 03:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I expected the decision to go against you. I hope the Bureaucrats come to the right decision. I will ask one to have a look at your RfA... SethWhales ^talk 23:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Does this mean it's in the bag? Keith-264 ( talk) 07:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hawkeye7 2/Bureaucrat chat Nick-D ( talk) 09:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Ah well Keith-264 ( talk) 20:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I wonder if the DYK-relevant pages could be set to template-protection, and you could leverage your template-editor rights? Do you think that would fly, from a technical or consensus perspective? Or am I completely off the mark... – xeno ^talk 02:46, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't think so. Why don't you do it? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 10:34, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Do what? Certainly not present the argument for it, I'm a relatively unknown around those parts. Which pages would need to be template-protected instead of fully-protected for you to work there? – xeno ^talk 13:50, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't know if we can do that, as the protection comes via the cascading protection from the main page. I don't know enough about such things? I guess it could be request to lift that cascading protection? If possible, it would definitely be a very good idea at looking at. Harrias ^talk 17:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it would involved lifting the cascading protection on the main page, so I don't think it is practical. By "do it", I meant "approve the DYK hooks". Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:16, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

We could probably change the cascading full-protection to cascading template-editor protection, but the question then becomes - is the community comfortable opening up editing of the mainpage to another 189 users who weren't specifically vetted for such a role? – xeno ^talk 00:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, I can see how this could have happened unintentionally. But I don't think it's entirely appropriate to notify/thank among others the 4 bureaucrats ( [40] [41] [42] [43]) who were positive towards your nomination, because they are still in the process of deciding the result. Anyway, I just felt I had to get that off my chest, and I don't want to cause any hassle. Feel free to remove this comment after you have read it. -- intgr  [talk] 11:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

( talk page stalker) Hawkeye thanked Avi for his work on the RFA, not his support (which Avi did not offer in any case), and the other three crats have recused themselves from the discussion, so the point, however well-meant, seems moot. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

You're a great editor who's feeling rather cheesed off at the moment. I get it. RfX is tough, even for successful candidates.

Take the advice on my usertalk and come chat with me in March. Because if you choose to, you can turn this around, and I'll happily turn this into a bluelink with a nomination in a few months if you do. -- Dweller ( talk) 13:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

So what if you don't get the position as an admin? Think of all of the readers you help out/make smile when you improve articles on the topics that interest you. Shouldn't that be enough motivation? - Knowledgekid87 ( talk) 14:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Please don't leave over it. Take some time out if you need to but don't leave for good. You'll be sorely missed :)-- 5 albert square ( talk) 20:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

It would be more motivating if I got some feedback from them. As it is, all I can see is page hit counts. But thanks. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

+1. Did you really join the project just to be an admin? Surely you joined to edit articles? -- GRuban ( talk) 20:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I did. But I do everything. Without I admin toolbox, I am constantly stymied. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

We once had such a feedback mechanism, but it had flaws. Maybe this is something we should look back into? Mz7 ( talk) 22:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Back in 2007, one RfA was basically not deemed successful with 201 supports and 71 opposes, but the usual RfA in those days had far more votes than any recent ones - even with auto-notification to editors. The issue then was (get this) how opposed the candidate was to off-Wiki sites that must not be named <g>. Collect ( talk) 14:44, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I regret to inform you that your recent request for adminship was closed as "no consensus to promote". I encourage you to review the comments in the discussion and on the talk page to see if there are areas in which you could make changes. This may allow you to have a successful RfA in the future. Thank you for your patience during the bureaucrat chat and during the RfA process itself. ··· 日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:53, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

You will make a fine admin. Must give it another go! - Ret.Prof ( talk) 13:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about the result, but thanks for bearing "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" for the betterment of Wikipedia. And thanks for your note. --Jules  (Mrjulesd) 19:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

To cut the b.s., I think the reason for the failure was because you were in the lower half of the 65-75% discretionary zone, it's probably as simple as that. Whatever the 'crats might say it's basically a numbers game. A no consensus result means you could try again, and probably pass, in six months time. Now I do think you could answered the questions a little differently, please contact me if you like for my views on a strategy. But if you've had enough of RfAs I understand, you have to be pretty brave to put yourself through that. Which makes you a bigger person than many. --Jules  (Mrjulesd) 19:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Sorry to see it went the way it did. I didn't expect it to be plain sailing but I wouldn't have nominated you if I didn't think you had a chance, nor if I didn't think you'd be a good admin. Okay, you got a lot of opposition; some of it we foresaw, some of it we didn't. There is certainly a feeling that you haven't learnt from the evens of four years ago, or haven't moved on, or haven't shown enough contrition. But remember very nearly two hundred of your peers supported you. That's quite an incredible turnout. The lengthy and well thought-out rationales from many of those editors, among them some of the most respected editors on Wikipedia, show that you have the trust of a significant majority of the community. Beyond that, even most of the opposers spoke highly of you and praised your work and your dedication to Wikipedia. To me, it says a lot about you that even many of your detractors went out of their way to praise your contribution. Besides, most admin work is boring grunt work that's forgotten about in seconds whereas you article work will be around in one form or another for decades. People will remember Wikipedia as an encyclopaedia—not necessarily a perfect one, but one that could at least provide a decent overview of any subject imaginable—not for all the vandals that were blocked, and that's down in no small part to you. So my advice would be not to focus on the final tally, but to dust yourself off and do what you do best. And if you find yourself in Blighty, let me know and I'll buy you a drink. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Harry. I'd really like to take you up on that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry the RFA didn't work out. This time. You're the reason I got my first FA. Absolutely the reason, because you encouraged me to go forward with the effort. I was at the point of completely throwing in the towel. If it wasn't for your being there at the exact correct moment to encourage me, I'd still be diddling around in the shadows somewhere. And besides that, you're a coordinator at WP MH - fulfill the term. Your content contributions on the Manhattan Project have been somewhat extraordinary. So, what's more important - the small handful who opposed at RFA, or those educators out there who are quite probably using your articles to teach students about the Manhattan Project. Carry on and try again later. We salute you for your tireless contributions. — Maile ( talk) 22:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Well put, Maile. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

On 3 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Charles V. Shank, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Charles V. Shank co-invented the distributed feedback laser? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Charles V. Shank. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

G'day Hawkeye. I am sorry to see your RfA ended up as it did. I followed it closely and winced at every new oppose – it truly can be a dreadful and unforgiving process. I hope that the last week or so hasn't dampened your enthusiasm for Wikipedia, content creation, or your eventual return to admin ranks. Just remember... we all love you at Milhist! Warm regards, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:19, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Do we ever... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 06:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I'd third Peacemaker and Ian. I hope that you don't let the folks with an ancient grudge and love of piling onto admins get you down - you're a better editor then them all stuck together. Nick-D ( talk) 07:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

I am sorry that your request for the tools did not succeed; although the !vote was about two to one in favour, we do know that it is not a simple mumerical majority decision. unfortunately, while a number of well-respected admins supported you, a similar number opposed. I would be happy to support again after a reasonable interval. -- Anthony Bradbury ^"talk" 13:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Hawkeye7 I too am saddened that your Request had a no consensus. Sometime in the future. I will definitely cast my vote for you later. Anyways, keep on updating this Wikipedia!

~The Special Wikipedian Tribble Award~ Go forth and multiply, we need more 'pedians like you!

You're a very special Wikipedian in my book. Your contributions to the encyclopedia - the many GAs, FAs and DYKs you've collaborated on are exemplary - and well, I have a special respect for editors who go that extra mile to produce quality work. Thank you for all you do and all you've done to make editing an enjoyable experience. Atsme 📞 📧 03:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC) Other fun banners are available at [44]

And Hawkeye7, I want to extend an invitation to you (it's actually a plea for help) to collaborate on a new project I just created, WP:Project Accuracy, for which I'd like to recruit other FP/GA/DYK editors to join. I'm in the embryonic stages of development - just now working on the header but I'm not very well-versed on changing syntax in templates, so I will probably just create a page header of my own design. I'm not sure why the TP isn't connecting or what categories to include or .... well, any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Atsme ^{📞 📧} 03:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A tribble! Always wanted one. Always willing to help out. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:18, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

I've got an ~in use~ template at the top of the page but you can ignore it if you see anything that needs fixing. Oh, and what I'd like to do is establish a 5 person PAC = Project Accuracy Coordinators who will oversee the project, and vet the fact-check promotion candidates who apply. This project is actually the foundation for a much bigger plan I proposed to WMF during their current community consultation re: their "Reach strategy. My suggestion was in regards to protection and promotion of articles that have passed stringent reviews and accuracy checks (and will carry our project seal which you can see at the project page). I tested the waters a tiny bit at Drmies TP, and now I'm hoping to get a good team together comprising content creators/FA participants/reviewers for PAC. Let me know if you're interested. Atsme ^{📞 📧} 07:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for uploading File:Harrie Massey.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. -- ImageTaggingBot ( talk) 13:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Canberra Meetup Next: 17 February 2016 This box: view talk

Hi, you're invited to the Canberra meetup which will take place at King O'Malley's Irish Pub in Civic on 17 February 2016. Bidgee ( talk) 01:34, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Landing at Lae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LCM. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey Hawkeye, do you have some spare time to perform a source review on Ride the Lightning for formatting and reliability? The FA nomination is here. I usually wait for the FA coordinators to make a request at the project's talk page, but I want to get pass the image/source procedures as quickly as possible, so I can focus on other issues. Thanks in advance.-- Retrohead ( talk) 23:04, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

	Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
	Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Wondering if you can tick off this one? It looks like it doesn't need a QPQ, so hopefully an easy affair! Jolly Ω Janner 06:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

 Done Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

18:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

On 12 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article X-10 Graphite Reactor, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the X-10 Graphite Reactor (pictured) was the first nuclear reactor to produce radioisotopes for medical use? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/X-10 Graphite Reactor. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:01, 12 February 2016 (UTC)

Are you keen to take this to GAN? If you are, I will put in the nom as a co-nom. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 01:28, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I thought the entire Huon Peninsula campaign could become a Good Topic, but we are still a couple of articles short. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:52, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

G'day, I'll have a go at improving Battle of Finschhafen, but I might have to try to get a few books from the library, so it could take a while. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 02:06, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

I was intending to have a go at it too, but I am still bogged down on the landing at Scarlet Beach. My idea was the Battle of Finschhafen would cover everything between Scarlet Beach and Sattelberg. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 03:38, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that sounds like a good idea. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 03:39, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Excellent job on theX-10 reactor! Thanks for your countless articles on the Manhattan project. Afernand74 ( talk) 15:26, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

Your free one-year account with Newspapers.com will end on March 2 2016. Newspapers.com has offered to extend existing accounts by another year. If you wish to keep your account until March 2 2017, please add your name to the Account Renewal list here. I'll let Newspapers.com customer support know, and they will extend your subscription. If you don't want to keep your account for another year, you don't have to do anything. Your account will expire unless I hear from you that you want to keep it. Thanks, HazelAB ( talk) 16:07, 13 February 2016 (UTC)

16:16, 15 February 2016 (UTC)

I was under the weather yesterday, but hopefully I'll get to this one today. - Dank ( push to talk) 12:52, 17 February 2016 (UTC)

	The Editor's Barnstar
	I see your edits and i commend you for the amount you have done. Winterysteppe ( talk) 05:16, 19 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Tom Kilburn page, your edit caused a cite error ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:18, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Your free one-year account with Newspapers.com will end on March 2 2016. Newspapers.com has offered to extend existing accounts by another year. If you wish to keep your account until March 2 2017, please add your name to the Account Renewal list here. I'll let Newspapers.com customer support know, and they will extend your subscription. If you don't want to keep your account for another year, you don't have to do anything. Your account will expire unless I hear from you that you want to keep it. HazelAB ( talk) 13:55, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

18:22, 22 February 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tom Kilburn 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 Yoshi24517 -- Yoshi24517 ( talk) 23:40, 23 February 2016 (UTC)

On 25 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Dumpu, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that in the Battle of Dumpu, Lieutenant Colonel Ralph Honner, although covered in blood and black ants, refused to be carried from the field for fear it might endanger the stretcher bearers? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Dumpu. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:03, 25 February 2016 (UTC)

On 27 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landing at Lae, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the first waves of the landing at Lae were carried in four destroyer transports? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Landing at Lae. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:02, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

G'day, Hawkeye, I was thinking of taking Battle of Wareo to GA next as part of the effort to get all the Huon Peninsula battle articles to GA. One concern I have, though, is the Japanese logistics section, which seems quite limited. I wonder if you have anything that you would like to add to the article before I nominate it. It was many years ago that I worked on it last, so I will need to get my head back into the article over the next week or so. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:53, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I have plenty of information on this. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 10:58, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

Cheers, hope you are having a good weekend. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:11, 27 February 2016 (UTC)

G'day, Hawkeye, I've nommed this for GAN now with you as a co-nom. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 09:46, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

G'day, Hawk, not sure if you are still keen on working on the Wareo and Finschhafen articles, but I have the Coates book for another couple of weeks or so, then I have to return it, unfortunately...I also have to go away for a week or so with work at the end of next week. If you have the time, Wareo still needs a bit of work regarding logistics, and Finschhafen...well, I'm completely out of my depth and it probably needs a considerable effort to bring it up to GA. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 12:41, 27 March 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on nuclear weapons in Britain and Nick-D on Australia's war in the Pacific Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the Kamurun Campaign of 1914–16 Timeline: This month in World War I

20:12, 29 February 2016 (UTC)

That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. Forty-seven competitors move into this round (a bit shy of the expected 64), and we are roughly broken into eight groups of six. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups.

Twenty-two Good Articles were submitted, including three by Cyclonebiskit ( submissions), and two each by MPJ-DK ( submissions), Hurricanehink ( submissions), 12george1 ( submissions), and Cas Liber ( submissions). Twenty-one Featured Pictures were claimed, including 17 by Adam Cuerden ( submissions) (the Round 1 high scorer). Thirty-one contestants saw their DYKs appear on the main page, with a commanding lead (28) by Cwmhiraeth ( submissions). Twenty-nine participants conducted GA reviews with J Milburn ( submissions) completing nine.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 02:39, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Metallurgical Laboratory 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 Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 14:01, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

This is for the effort made into creating your Wikipedia profile. Just wow. Amazing. :D Winterysteppe ( talk) 02:58, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Alan Shepard, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page National Guard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:15, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

Along with getting the year wrong in the newsletter that went out earlier this week, we did not mention (as the bot did not report) that Cas Liber ( submissions) claimed the first Featured Article Persoonia terminalis of the 2016 Wikicup. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email).-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 16:06, 2 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Metallurgical Laboratory you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Metallurgical Laboratory for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Cwmhiraeth -- Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 10:02, 3 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Tom Kilburn you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tom Kilburn for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Yoshi24517 -- Yoshi24517 ( talk) 05:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I'll be glad to help you, if you tell me the correct pronunciation. Let me see: it's pronounced as if spelled Deevers, isn't it? イヴァンスクルージ九十八 _（会話） 20:56, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Oh, wait, sorry; I saw it later :) イヴァンスクルージ九十八 _（会話） 20:58, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

Done! Happy I could be helpful!! イヴァンスクルージ九十八 _（会話） 21:02, 4 March 2016 (UTC)

I'd like to find someone to help with TFAs on Australian sports (such as Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 18, 2016). Any suggestions? - Dank ( push to talk) 03:46, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Sure. I can help you with that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:45, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Great, give it a few whacks. We're aiming for roughly 1150 characters in the text the readers see (not counting "Full article" and below); this page gives you a character counter. - Dank ( push to talk) 13:15, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

That's 1409 characters, I usually aim for 1150, I'll have a look now. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:27, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

1171 according to the counter. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:46, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

You have made many changes to the article John von Neumann, including adding statements directly contradicted by the cited sources and removing statements supported by cited reliable sources. I reverted two changes, then realized how many other problems you had introduced. I do not know what your purpose is, but this is really an extraordinary harm that you have made.
81.158.250.223 ( talk) 19:39, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

The purpose was to properly reference the article. Nothing properly referenced was removed. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:50, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Then use "citation needed". Additionally, making up a story about the cause of his divorce, etc., does not fall under "properly reference the article".
81.158.250.223 ( talk) 22:51, 6 March 2016 (UTC)

Never. I have supplied references. And the text has a reference. Did you check the reference? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:29, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

[76] No idea about the other problems, but at least about the divorce the IP is correct, the source does not support your statement that the car crash had anything to do with the divorce. Fram ( talk) 10:04, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

You can readily confirm that the book does not attribute the divorce to the car accident, but rather to Mariette wanting to party more: page 172 and following. Additionally, the book does not state that they had two parties per week, at least not on the pages cited.

Those are two examples of false claims that you have added to the article. An example of a true claim that you removed from the article is that von Neumann was fluent in Greek. [77] That von Neumann did know Greek is stated in the same book: page 48.

True, but the following sentence was about the professor of Byzantine history, and I couldn't find it in the reference given, or in Macrae. So I removed it while I went looking for it. I did eventually find it somewhere else, but forgot to put it back into the article. Now I guess I need to find it again, unless you happen to have a source. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 10:12, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

The "Professor of Byzantine History" thing is in the source given (Life magazine) [78], but as it there is said that he made the statement "jokingly", that part is better left out. Fram ( talk) 10:22, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

That's it!!! Thanks for that. I remember now. That's why I didn't put it back in. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Macrae also says that the rest of the family denies that Johnny and Max could converse in ancient Greek at age six. So I thought it best to leave that whole sentence out. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:58, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

Macrae does not say that the rest of the family denies that he knew Greek. Rather, Macrae says that the rest of the family denies that Johnny "converse[d] at the lunch table with his father in [Greek]" and the rest of the family did not understand; perhaps such conversations occurred only a few times and the rest of the family did not recall. The same page tells that his father instilled in him a love a Greek (and that Greek was a required subject in high school). A google search readily turns up other reliable sources: e.g. [79] which cites Poundstone (1993)—which is already cited in the article. 81.158.250.223 ( talk) 00:15, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I have now looked at five of your edits and found three in serious error. 81.158.250.223 ( talk) 22:26, 7 March 2016 (UTC) s.

You have now repeatedly demonstrated that your edits to the article should not be relied upon. What should be done? There seem to be two approaches: either someone needs to go through all your edits, checking each individually, or the article needs to be reverted to what it was before you started editing it. 81.158.250.223 ( talk) 00:15, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

The article is up for review, so the former will occur. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:47, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

20:24, 7 March 2016 (UTC)

Whack! You've been whacked with a wet trout. Don't take this too seriously. Someone just wants to let you know that you did something silly.

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Alan Shepard

added a link pointing to James Webb

Metallurgical Laboratory

added a link pointing to Roentgen

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:25, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

On 9 March 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landing at Scarlet Beach, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Landing at Scarlet Beach on 22 September 1943 was the first time Australian forces had made an opposed amphibious landing since the Gallipoli Campaign in 1915? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Landing at Scarlet Beach. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 9 March 2016 (UTC)

[94] I downloaded it from carl, it looks like a RS but I'm unsure how much to include in OOB articles, since some of the pdfs are 20 pages long. Is there a rule of thumb or a WP: on OOBs? Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 03:43, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Wow. What a source. I don't know of any rules about OrBats. I would toss it all in. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 04:05, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, I've seen individual pdfs from it but never realised that they were part of this. I shall fill my boots. Regards Keith-264 ( talk) 04:12, 10 March 2016 (UTC)

I visited a bunch of WikiProject Military History articles and they are pretty good. :D Winterysteppe ( talk) 01:56, 11 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, I kind of hate to say this, but there was still one good-faith delete vote in that AfD. I'm not sure it can really be speedily closed. Take a second look, please? Ladyof Shalott 01:00, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Ladyof Shalott 01:23, 13 March 2016 (UTC)

18:37, 14 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Para-alpine skiing classification, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages B2 and La Molina. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:24, 16 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Landing at Scarlet Beach 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 Parsecboy -- Parsecboy ( talk) 12:41, 17 March 2016 (UTC)

H, I see you're into the Manhattan Project. Too bad we have a minor disagreement about a comma. Both of my wife's parents worked on the Manhattan Project. See Larned B. Asprey, where you can see me, second from left, in the photo I took with self-timer. My mother-in-law is still sharp, if you need someone with recollection from Met lab days. She gave a speech about that time when she got the Walter H. Zinn Award in 2005. Dicklyon ( talk) 04:01, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Only a minor disagreement. No big. You are the fourth family member of an Atomic pioneer to contact me. I have written or improved about 100 articles related to the Manhattan Project, bringing a dozen or so all the way to featured status, including the main article. There were lots of biographies. Some are famous; some ought to be famous, but are not; and some are obscure. Isidor Isaac Rabi is currently a featured article candidate. Drop by and post a review. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:51, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

I added an infobox, some references and some commas, harmonised the date format, and repaired some link rot. Sent the article of for a MilHist B class assessment. Changes are here. As always, revert anything you don't like. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:02, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

Hawkeye7, since you approved this with the ALT1 hook, Maury Markowitz has suggested an ALT2 hook that he thinks is better. Can you please stop by one more time to take a look at the new hook and see whether it meets with your approval, and mark it accordingly? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 19:21, 20 March 2016 (UTC)

16:04, 21 March 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Stephen Jurika, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Daily News. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:52, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

The article Landing at Scarlet Beach you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Landing at Scarlet Beach for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Parsecboy -- Parsecboy ( talk) 12:41, 23 March 2016 (UTC)

Seen as you've done the lions share of work on the article, I thought it best to run this edit that I've made, by you. Essentially, prior to this edit, the article suggested that the rod removal was done by hand, however the reference below suggests that in the final moments it was not in fact done by hand. So I was wondering if you could clarify this ambiguity?

Richard Fox, who made the control-rod mechanism for the pile, remarked that the manual speed control that the operator had over the rods was simply a variable resistor, controlling an electric motor that would spool the " clothesline" wire over a pulley that also had two lead weights attached to ensure it would ' fail-safe' and return to its zero position when released. ^[1]

185.51.75.43 ( talk) 10:06, 24 March 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-Class content Book review: Hawkeye7 discusses a Panzer general and a "mercenary mum" Op-ed: TomStar81 on the terrible battles of 1916 Timeline: This month in World War I

On 28 March 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Tom Kilburn, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Tom Kilburn (pictured), the co-creator of the the world's first stored-program computer, did not own a personal computer? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Tom Kilburn. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:57, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

19:43, 28 March 2016 (UTC)

22:13, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alan Shepard 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 Casliber -- Casliber ( talk) 09:20, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

I saw your post on User talk:Dicklyon. I'm also having a problem with this guy's war-on-commas. (See here) Did you come to any resolution? Cheers - ^theWOLFchild 17:02, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. (see here) - ^theWOLFchild 17:58, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

Was just having a look at ANZAC Day and saw you've got a rather nice Australian Military History today's featured article set for it. Nice work! I had hoped for a good Australian MILHIST article to pair with a Maori Battalion image I prepared for POTD. =) Adam Cuerden ^{( talk)} 00:11, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

That sounds great! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 03:22, 7 April 2016 (UTC)

The article Alan Shepard you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alan Shepard for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Casliber -- Casliber ( talk) 01:01, 8 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Bruno Pontecorvo, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Parrafin. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:58, 10 April 2016 (UTC)

Hey! relatively new editor here. I wanted to comment on the military history WikiProject. I think its one of the best and biggest one. Perhaps even more extensive than others. Looks good. Quite expansive. I'll be ha ppy to just read through everything. DesertGrass ( talk) 04:09, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

Thank you! Enjoy! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:24, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

20:44, 11 April 2016 (UTC)

20:40, 18 April 2016 (UTC)

H, I don't think that saying "The Metallurgical Laboratory or 'Met Lab' was the code name ..." makes any sense. You need to either use the term or refer to it (see Use–mention distinction), but this mixes them up. You could say "Metallurgical Laboratory or Met Lab was the code name", or you could say "The Metallurgical Laboratory or 'Met Lab' was part of ...". Yes? Dicklyon ( talk) 02:23, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea what you're talking about. @ Dank: Paging the expert. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 03:13, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

I get what you're saying, Dick, but I have a hunch it's not going to fly, because Wikipedians (at least the ones who write FAC-level history articles) aren't used to starting an article that way. Fortunately, the article is currently at A-class ( Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Metallurgical Laboratory) ... float the idea there and we'll see if it sinks or swims. (P.S. Yes that was a humorous exercise in mixed metaphors.) - Dank ( push to talk) 12:12, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Actually, starting an article that way is not very common, and is often fixed by wikignomes. I think there's something in the MOS about it.. I'll look. Dicklyon ( talk) 17:53, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

Agreed, Dick. What I'm saying is that "X was the code name" is a less common way to start one of the articles I normally copyedit, regardless of whether X is italicized or not. FWIW, my call would be "The Metallurgical Laboratory was part of" or "The Metallurgical Laboratory of the (whatever) was part of". - Dank ( push to talk) 18:02, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

I made an edit; see if you like it, and chip in at conversation I started at Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style#Use versus mention in lede sentences. Dicklyon ( talk) 18:38, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

		Military history service award
		On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 6 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period January to March 2016. Thank you for your efforts! Anotherclown ( talk) 10:37, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Jenna Jones, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Rio. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:44, 20 April 2016 (UTC)

True, must have been tired.-- Grahame ( talk) 01:24, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 05:31, 21 April 2016 (UTC)

Worm^TT( talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Worm^TT( talk) 09:08, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

Worm^TT( talk) 21:22, 24 April 2016 (UTC)

21:02, 25 April 2016 (UTC)

The Library of Congress, the U.S. Federal Judicial Center, the Wisconsin Historical Society, MacArthur's own tombstone, and other reputable sources all give his birthdate as 1815. Care to rethink your edit? 32.218.34.11 ( talk) 21:39, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

 Done Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:05, 26 April 2016 (UTC)

Hawkeye, I'll start work on this one today. You nominated the article at WP:FAC. - Dank ( push to talk) 14:23, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

A great edit, thanks. Sorry for the mixup. - Dank ( push to talk) 21:53, 27 April 2016 (UTC)

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 05:51, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australian spies, Nick-D on the German Army Op-ed: TomStar81 on the 1916 Easter Rising Timeline: This month in World War I

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Melissa Tapper, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page The Standard. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:05, 30 April 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John von Neumann 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 Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 ( talk) 07:00, 1 May 2016 (UTC)

20:09, 2 May 2016 (UTC)

Round 2 is over and 35 competitors have moved on to Round 3.

Round 2 saw three FAs (two by Cas Liber ( submissions) and one by Montanabw ( submissions)), four Featured Lists (with three by Calvin999 ( submissions)), and 53 Good Articles (six by Worm That Turned ( submissions) and five each by Hurricanehink ( submissions), Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), and MPJ-DK ( submissions)). Eleven Featured Pictures were promoted (six by Adam Cuerden ( submissions) and five by Godot13 ( submissions)). One Featured Portal, Featured Topic and Good Topic were also promoted. The DYK base point total was 1,135. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) scored 265 base points, while The C of E ( submissions) and MPJ-DK ( submissions) each scored 150 base points. Eleven ITN were promoted and 131 Good Article Reviews were conducted with MPJ-DK ( submissions) completing a staggering 61 reviews. Two contestants, Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) and Cas Liber ( submissions), broke the 700 point mark for Round 2.

If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Thanks to everyone for participating, and good luck to those moving into round 2. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email) -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 03:00, 5 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to Tube Alloys may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "[]"s. If you have, don't worry: just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

List of unpaired brackets remaining on the page:

• concerns about [[patent]] rights; that the French team would attempt to patent [nuclear reactor] technology based on the pre-war work. As a compromise, Thomson suggested relocating the team to

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, BracketBot ( talk) 09:44, 8 May 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. It appears that you copied or moved text from Quebec Agreement into Tube Alloys. While you are welcome to re-use Wikipedia's content, here or elsewhere, Wikipedia's licensing does require that you provide attribution to the original contributor(s). When copying within Wikipedia, this is supplied at minimum in an edit summary at the page into which you've copied content. It is good practice, especially if copying is extensive, to also place a properly formatted {{ copied}} template on the talk pages of the source and destination. The attribution has been provided for this situation, but if you have copied material between pages before, even if it was a long time ago, please provide attribution for that duplication. You can read more about the procedure and the reasons at Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia. Thank you. — Diannaa ( talk) 20:37, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

This is the article before I began updating it in May. It was already there. In fact, it was in the oldest version of the article from 1 June 2007. It is possible that it did absorb the Quebec Agreement article at that point, given that it was inserted into that article in November 2005. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:19, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Okey dokey, looks like it was a false positive. Sorry for the mistake. — Diannaa ( talk) 23:23, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

I ran an automated search, and it looks like I did lift four sentences from another article I wrote, British contribution to the Manhattan Project, which I have acknowledged on the talk page. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:17, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

Adding attribution is not mandatory when copying your own prose from one article to another, but it would help me if you did so, as such copying can trigger a bot report, and it speeds up checking the items if the edit summary mentions the copying. User:EranBot/Copyright/rc is the bot report I am working from. — Diannaa ( talk) 13:46, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

I have done so. I think what happened with the Quebec Conference material is that I moved another paragraph, and it thought that the material was new. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:39, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

23:22, 9 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Wallace Akers, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page James Conant. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:58, 10 May 2016 (UTC)

If she quotes Baxter on anything it is not a RS. You as a supposed historian should know this. Juan Riley ( talk) 23:27, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

Margaret Gowing was the official historian. She is a reliable source. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:43, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

She was, yes, an "official" historian. Which means she was paid to be official. Where does she say someone other than Baxter told her he was invited back by Groves? Without that just a government sponsored questionable source. No? Juan Riley ( talk) 23:47, 12 May 2016 (UTC)

An official historian is given access to the documents, which have not yet been opened to the public. The original manuscript is footnoted with the documents used as references, similar to the Wikipedia. If you have the required security clearance under the Official Secrets Act, you can go to the Public Record Office in Kew and get the manuscript. You can then request the file containing the footnoted document, which is probably a formal request from Groves to Wallace Akers. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Ah now 'tis all secret? Sorry I tried to discuss matters as if you were a real historian. Nothing of this material would be subject to security clearances. (Psst I have one.) Will dissect your article on the factotum in the coming days. Have a nice day. Juan Riley ( talk) 00:15, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Please think about your reputation before you proceed further. Juan Riley ( talk) 00:18, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

If anyone has to worry about their reputation, I don't think it's Hawkeye. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 15:16, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Just wanted to say a big thank you for this article. Well constructed, informative & also congratulations on getting the article featured on main page. Shire Lord ( talk) 11:24, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Excellent article yesterday - many thanks. Ignore the self-appointed "experts" (even those who claim to be so important as to have "security clearance"): it's a very good piece of work. Cheers - SchroCat ( talk) 12:06, 13 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Tube Alloys you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 20:20, 15 May 2016 (UTC)

16:01, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Greetings. I was wondering if you could start a new backlog reduction drive. My proposal can be found here: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#Lists of Wars Backlog.-- Catlemur ( talk) 19:53, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Bridie Kean

added a link pointing to Sunshine Coast

Werner Goering

added a link pointing to Bauer

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:58, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

		The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds
		On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am hereby award you the A-class medal with diamonds for your efforts in promoting the articles on Jacob L. Devers, Chicago Pile-1, and X-10 Graphite Reactor to A-Class standard. Well done, and thanks for your efforts! Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:12, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

WP:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page appears to have been emptied on 17th May by User:FACBot... Thx GrahamHardy ( talk) 12:09, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Yikes!!! I have resolved the problem. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:09, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

:-) GrahamHardy ( talk) 22:24, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

18:40, 23 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Montreal Laboratory, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Quebec Conference and Edward Appleton. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:31, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm sorry about that. I agree that it's going to cause some pain. Whatamidoing (WMF) ( talk) 18:47, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

I've changed the FACBot and MilHistBot to use https. Everything should be okay, but I depart for Italy for Wikimania on 16 June so... Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:04, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

Has anyone thanked you recently for the work you do with FACBot? Thank you! -- Laser brain (talk) 21:40, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Montreal Laboratory at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! North America ¹⁰⁰⁰ 12:45, 25 May 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 12:01, 27 May 2016 (UTC)

Just to say the John von Neumann has passed at GA. A hearty congratulations on your thorough treatment of a multi-faceted individual! Hchc2009 ( talk) 07:45, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

The article John von Neumann you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John von Neumann for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 ( talk) 08:01, 28 May 2016 (UTC)

16:19, 30 May 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Margaret Gowing

added a link pointing to National Portrait Gallery

Rita Harradence

added a link pointing to Hamstead

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:52, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Not necessarily disputing your revert of that comment, as I personally am opposed to IPs being involved in discussions of this kind. However, I cannot find anything in the reassessment instructions saying it is only for registered users, only that closing is only for registered users. Can you point to where that's stated? Not seeing anything at Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/guidelines. Thanks. Coretheapple ( talk) 14:47, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

It says you have to be "logged in". The reasoning is that a GAR is a workshop where we attempt to repair whatever is wrong with the article. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:46, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

I saw that. It is says "use the community reassessment process if you are logged in." That's a clear reference to starting a reassessment. It's not a ban on participation. There should be a ban (ANI too) but there is not. Coretheapple ( talk) 21:59, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

The Board of Trustees of the Wikimedia Foundation has appointed a committee to lead the search for the foundation’s next Executive Director. One of our first tasks is to write the job description of the executive director position, and we are asking for input from the Wikimedia community. Please take a few minutes and complete this survey to help us better understand community and staff expectations for the Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director.

• Survey, (hosted by Qualtrics)

Thank you, The Wikimedia Foundation Executive Director Search Steering Committee via MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:48, 1 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Montreal Laboratory you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 16:41, 2 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there.... Jack Verge, which you passed for GA, is currently a FAC. If you have the opportunity to review it, I would be extremely grateful. FunkyCanute ( talk) 10:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Tube Alloys you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Tube Alloys for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 18:41, 3 June 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:01, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your response HERE. I found it very useful and have already used it to solve my problem.

Also, I attempted to edit the template Template:Convert to reflect the currency conversion information you provided me (perhaps a note like "For currency conversion into US dollars, please see Template:To USD" under a heading like "Currency conversion to US dollars") but, despite my additional rights, I cannot edit this template (no surprises here...). If you have template edit rights, you might want to add the link you gave me ( Template:To USD) into the documentation area of the Template:Convert template, as I found it very useful and suspect other editors may find it useful too. Thanks. Mercy11 ( talk) 18:58, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

 Done Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:18, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Great! Nice to have people like you in the "staff". Mercy11 ( talk) 02:18, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

	The Writer's Barnstar
	Well, I saw your most recent edits, since it was on my watchlist. Nice TheDwellerCamp ( talk) 23:15, 4 June 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 on Australian spies (part two) Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the Battle of Jutland Timeline: Events of World War I

20:51, 6 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited K-25, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Bureau of Mines. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:05, 8 June 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing this, it's much appreciated. Just checking what the referencing gaps are, as I may have underdone the multi-sentence citations. If it's the table, would it be preferable for me to add a reference for each line, or for each field (this last might be overkill).

Am idly keen to get this to B so am happy to go back through and add more reference points as required. -- Euryalus ( talk) 09:03, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

You don't need a reference for each line, just each paragraph. At the moment the Caribbean service and Peace and decommissioning sections have unreferenced sentences at the end. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:12, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Sorry about that - a consequence of using one ref for two sentences, then forgetting I'd done it when moving paragraphs around. Should be fixed now. -- Euryalus ( talk) 15:31, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

"I've charged three more prep areas". Thank you. You make it look so easy. Yoninah ( talk) 09:14, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 11:29, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

On 9 June 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article John von Neumann, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that John von Neumann (pictured) once wrote that "anyone who considers arithmetical methods of producing random digits is, of course, in a state of sin"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/John von Neumann. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 11:29, 9 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ames Project you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek ( talk) 03:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Ames Project you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Ames Project for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek ( talk) 04:21, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi, a community good article reassessment has been started for the article on Hyazinth Graf Strachwitz, which you edited. The reassessment page can be found here, if you would like to comment on whether the article still meets the GA criteria, or to provide suggestions about how it could be improved so that it can retain its GA status. K.e.coffman ( talk) 04:47, 11 June 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:05, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

Your articles are such a pleasure to read, thank you! Incredible work. Gareth E. Kegg ( talk) 08:11, 12 June 2016 (UTC)

18:41, 13 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited K-25, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Big Bend of the Columbia River. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 11:08, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:02, 15 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Ames Project you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ames Project for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek ( talk) 04:01, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey there Hawkeye! Awhile back, for some reason (probably stemming from the Apollo program article) I stumbled across your userpage. I liked the boxes that you had for various categories, and then noticed the astronaut pages. I work in aerospace and have a strong interest in improving the Apollo era astronaut articles. I took your info boxes, updated them, and put them on my userpage. My plan was for users to sign up for individual astronauts with the goal of improving their articles to a minimum of B-class.

By chance, you happened to assess the first of those articles!

I was hoping for your advice on how I should continue with this. I am relatively new to Wikipedia. I was planning on including it as a subpage on WikiProject Spaceflight, but the project is pretty inactive. I can't really add it to MilHist because not all of them were pilots (although its pretty close...).

Have any thoughts for how I could proceed with this? Let me know, thanks!

Kees08 ( talk) 23:30, 19 June 2016 (UTC)

Long ago I intended to bring them up to Good Topics. The boxes are the ones used for Good Topic nominations. I did more than assess one; I brought Alan Shepard up to Good Article status. If you would be willing to co-nominate it with me, we could send it to FAC. I am willing to collaborate on projects like this. While WikiProject Spaceflight is pretty inactive, it would be best to locate it there, as that would be the most likely spot for someone else to find it. I am willing to sign up to do Gus Grissom. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:46, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

I would be willing to collaborate on that effort. I didn't even know Good Topics were a thing....if there is a better format for me to use let me know.

I have located the page on WikiProject Spaceflight. I think I have Gus under my name because I just grabbed the Purdue astronauts, but you are more than welcome to put your name there.

I'll do a bit of light recruiting by looking at what users have been editing astronaut articles. Should be able to make a pretty big impact with this project! Feel free to edit the project page with any of your thoughts or suggestions, I did the best that I could but again am pretty new to editing. As a side note, I have been finding citations for the Apollo Program article off and on, but that has been quite the project. Hopefully I can close that out soon. Cheer! Kees08 ( talk) 03:34, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

No worries. I'll take Scott Carpenter instead. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:25, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

Roger that, I have moved the page to WikiProject Spaceflight and it is now located here Kees08 ( talk) 06:09, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 00:01, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

19:14, 20 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Montreal Laboratory you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Montreal Laboratory for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 00:41, 21 June 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Margaret Gowing 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 Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 07:40, 23 June 2016 (UTC)

15:42, 27 June 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 19:38, 28 June 2016 (UTC)

The article Margaret Gowing you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Margaret Gowing for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 08:41, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi there. You may have already seen my note on the MilHist talk page, but I am sending this short note to the regular writers and the editors of The Bugle to point them to a WWI projects directory that I've started (in my userspace for now). Would you be able to look and see if there is anything you might be able to add or advice on what is most useful? You'll note that I've pulled together WWI-related book reviews (I think you wrote some of them), so please feel free to add to that if I missed any (plus any more that get written in the future). Carcharoth ( talk) 22:24, 1 July 2016 (UTC)

Four years ago ...

people in sports and battles
... you were recipient no. 171 of Precious, a prize of QAI!

-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:46, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for today's Silverplate! -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 05:54, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

19:45, 4 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Thanks for looking over my DYK nom. My only quick question is what is QPQ? It's been a while since I've done a DYK. :) Couldn't find any info on that page either. Andrzejbanas ( talk) 12:21, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

See WP:DYKRULES: For every nomination you make you must review one other nomination (unrelated to you)— this is called quid pro quo or QPQ.

So you need to review someone else's nomination. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:37, 8 July 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on the Australian Imperial Force Op-ed: TomStar81 looks at the Battle of the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

Hi Hawkeye, If you think that List of public art in the City of Sydney is now resolved enough to have its DYK nomination restored, could you please do that and request the afternoon of Thursday August 4 (Sydney time)? I will continue adding geocodes to it and of course, there are more items that can be added to the list in future. Thanks! Whiteghost.ink ( talk) 13:10, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

I have posted to the DYK nomination page why I think this would not be appropriate. It's best if someone else reviews the article at this point. Thank you for your understanding. BlueMoonset ( talk) 16:47, 7 July 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 01:49, 9 July 2016 (UTC)

15:14, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

	The Writer's Barnstar
	I think Richard Feynman was awesome, I have three of his books plus the Gribbin biography. Such a worthy project! — Diannaa ( talk) 03:23, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Also pinging the co-nom, Reedmalloy. How does the TFA text look? - Dank ( push to talk) 22:54, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Should we say that Bockscar is the one pictured? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:59, 15 July 2016 (UTC)

Sounds good. Done. - Dank ( push to talk) 00:04, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll be able to have a look next week. Dapi89 ( talk) 15:22, 16 July 2016 (UTC)

12:01, 18 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Matthew McShane

added a link pointing to Skating

Tom O'Neill-Thorne

added a link pointing to National Wheelchair Basketball League

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:20, 20 July 2016 (UTC)

Hello, I'm ReferenceBot. I have automatically detected that an edit performed by you may have introduced errors in referencing. It is as follows:

• On the Stephen Colbert at the 2006 White House Correspondents' Association Dinner page, your edit caused a broken reference name ( help). ( Fix | Ask for help)

Please check this page and fix the errors highlighted. If you think this is a false positive, you can report it to my operator. Thanks, ReferenceBot ( talk) 00:21, 21 July 2016 (UTC)

Hawkeye7, this was initially requested to be saved for the Olympics, but the date you eventually specified, 9 September, is well after the Olympics will be over. Did you perhaps mean 9 August, which appears to be one of the swimming competition dates? Please let me know here; I can move it if so. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:06, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Oops. Wrong Athlete. I mean 7 August. Sorry bout that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:25, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 15:16, 22 July 2016 (UTC)

		Military history reviewers' award
		On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the Milhist reviewing award (1 stripe) for reviewing a total of 3 Milhist articles during the period March to June 2016. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 02:27, 23 July 2016 (UTC) Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{ WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Ranks may not be hyphenated today, but they were most certainly hyphenated when McCay was alive and the rank he held was Lieutenant-General, not Lieutenant General; they actually knew how to spell then! We do not do revisionism here. It would be like calling a WWI Brigadier-General a Brigadier because "that's what they're called now". -- Necrothesp ( talk) 01:00, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

The article is written in Australian English, per the Commonwealth Style Guide. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Did you actually read what I wrote? I'm not disputing that Australia (and indeed Britain) spell it without a hyphen now. We don't revise terms to their modern equivalent. I have raised the issue on Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

A brigadier is not the same rank as a brigadier general. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:35, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

It is an entirely equivalent rank. Brigadier-General was abolished and replaced by Colonel-Commandant, which was itself abolished and replaced with Brigadier. The only difference was in the rank insignia and the lack of general officer status. As I'm sure you're fully aware, Commonwealth brigadiers are considered to rank alongside non-Commonwealth brigadier generals. -- Necrothesp ( talk) 14:34, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Would you care to enlighten me why you think, Neo-Nazi publications (e.g. Range, Kurowksi, Schaulen) are needed in WWII articles? ÄDA - DÄP VA ( talk) 06:34, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I've pinged you about these two books earlier today: please see Talk:List_of_Knight's_Cross_of_the_Iron_Cross_recipients_(Schu–Sz). K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:33, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Mass changes require an RfC. You need to secure consensus for them. Take it to WP:MILHIST. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:38, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Not a policy or a guideline I'm aware of. Please also see: WP:NOCONSENSUS. These books are not used for citations, so the onus is on those who advocate the inclusion of the disputed sources in the articles. K.e.coffman ( talk) 06:40, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Fair enough. Go ahead, citing WP:FURTHER as the reason, so long as they are only used in the Further Reading section. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

This has been discussed ad nauseam, so there is no need for another RfC. The removal is merely quality control or implementation Of WP:REFSPAM. ÄDA - DÄP VA ( talk) 06:43, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

You're saying that they were inserted by a spammer? That would be a valid reason, but I'm not seeing that. In the page above, they were inserted by MisterBee, one of our best and most highly regarded editors, back in 2007. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:22, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

I did not say that anyone in particular is a spammer. I have pointed out the problematic nature of the source some time back. The general consensus was not to use them if possible. No matter why and by whom they were introduced into the articles at the first place, they are not RS and therefore should be removed unless there is a good reason to do so. In the recent drive to remove non-RS, I was careful not to remove them, if they were used for inline citations. Now, for what ever reason MisterBee used publications not meeting RS criteria is a mystery to me, the result is - in fact - a considerable amount of spam in German WWII biographies. ÄDA - DÄP VA ( talk) 16:57, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

May point you to a relevant section of my user page for some background? Please see: Vandal's Cross of the Iron Cross in Gold with Swords and Diamonds. K.e.coffman ( talk) 07:31, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Would you self revert please? Separately re: "so long as they are only used in the Further Reading section", if these sources were used for citations, would an RfC be required to remove these sources and citations? K.e.coffman ( talk) 22:54, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Done. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Thank you, but it looks like not all of them got done. Could you address this? K.e.coffman ( talk) 01:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Not if it was done individually, and the source was replaced with another. On any mass edit, we expect to find an edit text referring to the decision or policy. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:58, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Re "if the source was replaced with another" — what if a neo-Nazi source was the only one available, such as Franz Kurowski at Otto Kittel article? K.e.coffman ( talk) 23:01, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

They must have used some source. Replace with their original source. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:21, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

"Replace with their original source" appears to be a suggestion that an editor procures a neo-Nazi source in question so that they could look up the sources this publication used. Is that correct?

Hi, in you are unfamiliar with this aspect of German WWII historiography, these two threads from the MilHist archives are good for background:

• 2013: Recent deletions of unreliable sources and
• "Immortal German soldiers".

It's hard for English speakers to understand the intricacies of the German publishing scene, to see which books are reliable sources and which come from dubious authors and publishers, so the threads above provide a good overview. I've also been collecting right-wing German publishers on my user page. Here's the link for reference:

• Known right-wing publishers.

I've only become aware of this fringe space once I started doing research for the HIAG (Waffen-SS lobby group) article. Hope this helps! K.e.coffman ( talk) 03:46, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 14:17, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Done

19:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Hi mate, your MilHist and FAC bots continue to make life easier for the coords, but one of them could use another tweak when/if you get time: I noticed just now that the A-Class Showcase is being populated with new A-Class articles but extant articles that have since progressed to FA are still there, e.g. No. 1 Flying Training School RAAF, No. 1 Squadron RAAF, No. 2 Operational Conversion Unit RAAF, just to name some in which I have a personal interest. I guess it's the same situation and potential solution as removing articles from the GA lists when they progress to FA. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 02:48, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

I released a set of bug fixes last week. I will fix this one next week. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 04:11, 29 July 2016 (UTC)

Y Tricky because of the use of templates by the ship articles. Ran a script to remove them. I have equipped the FACBot with the means to carry this out from now on. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:03, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Could you please check Wikipedia:Featured article review/Enceladus/archive1? Not sure what's gone wrong there. Thanks. DrKay ( talk) 11:33, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Y The coordinator set the FAR status to "keep" instead of "kept". I told the Bot that "keep" means "kept", and it processed the closure. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:54, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

21:48, 1 August 2016 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For the continuing upgrades, and prompt attention to change requests for, your brilliant bots that streamline the FAC and MilHist ACR processes! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 08:07, 4 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Richard Feynman 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 Jclemens -- Jclemens ( talk) 05:00, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Richard Feynman you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Richard Feynman for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jclemens -- Jclemens ( talk) 06:01, 5 August 2016 (UTC)

Good work on the Jeffrey Grey article - only one typo for me to copyedit! I've updated his Wikidata entry based on the article, and updated the de.wp article with his death as well, but you did the hard work. Thryduulf ( talk) 22:53, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I hadn't noticed that he had an article on the German Wikipedia. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:10, 6 August 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at disease control and defence satellites Op-ed: TomStar81 on the rise of air power Timeline: This month in World War I

— Maile ( talk) 19:27, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

15:41, 8 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicole Moerig, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page UCI. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:41, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Matthew Sands 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 Pax85 -- Pax85 ( talk) 00:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Matthew Sands you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Matthew Sands for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pax85 -- Pax85 ( talk) 05:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 11:12, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I know that technically it's not over yet, but how'd I do for my first GAN review? I notice you've been around the GAN block a few times, and many of the mentors seem to be inactive, so I thought you might be able to provide some feedback. It won't affect whether the article passes or fails, unless you give me negative feedback of course. ;) - Pax Verbum 15:08, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

I just promoted the article. Thank you for introducing me to Prof. Sands and for your prompt attention! Apparently the bot will be along shortly to deliver the "official" message... As my first review, I hope it didn't give you too much of a headache! - Pax Verbum 19:55, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Your GA review was really well done; you covered all the bases. The most common problem I have with GA reviewers is a tendency to go overboard and conduct a Featured Article Candidate review. In the case of Sands, the article was not on my list of Manhattan Project articles that I needed to fix; I just thought that it deserved improvement. Alas, the image is the only one we have; higher resolution images were only created for the most prominent Manhattan Project figures. The real problem is the United States, which does not promote the use of creative commons for images. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:29, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Ah yes, that happens to me as well - I stumble upon an article that I had no intention of working on, then an hour or two later.... Thank you for the kind comments. I will try to keep that in mind as I work on other reviews! I just wish FAC had the nice organized templates that GAN uses. I know that FAC has many more editors who focus on specialities, but some of us just like the nicely defined boxes. :) In any case, thank you again, and happy editing! - Pax Verbum 15:24, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

The article Matthew Sands you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Matthew Sands for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Pax85 -- Pax85 ( talk) 20:01, 10 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Matthew Sands at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Andrew D. ( talk) 17:19, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Hey Hawkeye, sorry for interrupting you again, but can you do another source check on Ride the Lightning? I've nominated it again for FA, and there are few new references such as the Glenn Pillsbury book (ref 27), the Metal Hammer cite (ref 23) and two reviews in "Reception" (Rock Hard and Uncut). Here's the FAC and hope you can do the check. Have a nice day.-- Retrohead ( talk) 19:01, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

19:37, 15 August 2016 (UTC)

Thanks so much for reviewing the article - I really appreciate it. As I am planning on taking it to FA, could you please offer me any thoughts on what improvements to make prior to this grueling process? Thanks, GAB ^gab 20:37, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

It's pretty much there. Go through the references and double check them. Footnote 10 is a journal, so probably best down the bottom with the books; it is volume 125 issue 8, p. 38. Make sure the web references have access dates (ie footnotes 11, 12, 13, 14 etc) The likely point of contention is the International reactions section. Think about why it is there and what it does. If you want to keep it, prepare to defend it. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:10, 17 August 2016 (UTC)

Not sure if U.S. News and World Report is really a journal, per se, but thanks for the advice. The "international reactions" section may indeed be better as prose. Best, GAB ^gab 00:56, 18 August 2016 (UTC)

I've adjusted the "Reactions" section by stripping out superfluous elements and integrating it into the "Aftermath" section; the article is now up at FA (fingers crossed!) Best, GAB ^gab 16:24, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 19 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello Hawkeye, while updating HMS Emerald (1795) to FA, your bot appears to have messed up the DYK entry on on the talk page [ [239]]. I would fix it myself but I'm not sure what needs doing. I also thought you might like to know in case this is a recurring problem. Best regards -- Ykraps ( talk) 06:20, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Y I have fixed the article talk page, and the problem. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:03, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Ah, I think I can see now what needed to be done. Thanks for that.-- Ykraps ( talk) 08:28, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article K-25 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 Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 09:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 12:01, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, here's another one of yours at TFA, I'm working on the TFA text now. - Dank ( push to talk) 18:35, 20 August 2016 (UTC)

Looks fine. I made some small tweaks. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:27, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

The article K-25 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:K-25 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 00:21, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

I'll be in Canberra from the 29-30 August, there is a planned meet-up at King O'Malley's (though I'm open to suggestions) from 6pm on the 29 August. Sorry for the short noticed, only had the trip confirmed this afternoon. Bidgee ( talk) 11:15, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

21:18, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ernest Titterton, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Tamworth. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:41, 24 August 2016 (UTC)

As an incubator tier task force, we reached 4 active members and 1 sporadic, with one that is retired but may return, I followed the instructions of Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators and made all of the necessary categories, an infobox and the templates, I was wondering who I should ask to include us in the talk page template, I have already added the baseline of |Roman= to the template, but have not touched the underlying code to make it work. Thanks. Iazyges ( talk) 23:23, 25 August 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, three more FAC promotions don't seem to have been recognised by the bot:

• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Did You Hear What Happened to Charlotte King?/archive1
• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/No Me Queda Más/archive1
• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Emma Stone/archive2 (N.B. Nominator has since manually closed)

FYI, two others promoted at the same time were closed by the bot:

• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Canadian National Vimy Memorial/archive4
• Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/California State Route 94/archive1

Pls let me know if there's anything Andy or I can do to try and prevent issues for the bot -- generally I've expected probs if the article name changes mid-FAC but we generally spot that and alter the nomination accordingly. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 07:04, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

• It didn't like the GA template on Did You Hear What Happened to Charlotte King?, which was in an invalid form. I will have to make it more tolerant of stuff-ups like that. Unfortunately, I am away at the Paralympics in September, and don't want to fiddfle with it at the present time. So I just corrected the talk page, and let it run. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:30, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Matthew Sands at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! — Maile ( talk) 22:14, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

I've pretty much completed the review. It's in a collapsed section at the bottom, to visually separate it from the prior stuff. We just need to discuss a hook you want, whatever that is. — Maile ( talk) 22:14, 27 August 2016 (UTC)

Yes, we should add the military unit number field to the infobox template. Kges1901 ( talk) 08:04, 28 August 2016 (UTC)

16:01, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Project Y at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! -- DYKReviewBot ( report bugs) 16:09, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

During a recent lengthy discussion on the WP:FAC talkpage, several ideas were put forward as to how this procedure could be improved, particularly in making it more user-friendly towards first-time nominees. The promotion rate for first-timers at FAC is depressingly low – around 16 percent – which is a cause for concern. To help remedy this, Mike Christie and I, with the co-operation of the FAC coordinators, have devised a voluntary mentoring scheme, in which newcomers will guided by more experienced editors through the stages of preparation and submission of their articles. The general format of the scheme is explained in more detail on Wikipedia: Mentoring for FAC, which also includes a list of editors who have indicated that they are prepared to act as mentors.

Would you be prepared to take on this role occasionally? If so, please add your name to the list. By doing so you incur no obligation; it will be entirely for you to decide how often and on which articles you want to act in this capacity. We anticipate that the scheme will have a trial run for a few months before we appraise its effectiveness. Your participation will be most welcome. Brianboulton ( talk) 18:44, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:02, 31 August 2016 (UTC)

I seem to remember reading somewhere that the Chicago Pile 1 Chianti bottle was signed by everyone present. If true, that fact would go well in the caption of the bottle, don't you think? Alanscottwalker ( talk) 00:47, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

This is mentioned in the article, which contains a picture of the bottle, with the caption It was signed by the participants Hawkeye7 ( talk) 11:44, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

Ah, sorry. (weird that i missed it). Alanscottwalker ( talk) 13:38, 3 September 2016 (UTC)

• Congrats on the FAC. Alanscottwalker ( talk) 15:19, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Regarding your edit to Dicklyon's comment here:

(I realize that in this edit you made a substantive comment of your own, much later on the page. But this is about your edit to Dicklyon's cmt.)

I'm a little puzzled why you would edit someone else's comment, and not for any reason that I can see is covered by WP:TPOC. But that aside, the markup you changed it to was incorrect: When using a "spaced en dash" (an en dash with a space on either side), if you want to use a non-breaking space, you would use the nbsp in place of the first space. Not the second.

Should the line be wrapped at that point, then the way you had it, the word before the dash would end the preceding line and then the next line would begin with the dash and a space. No, no, no. You don't want the reader to have to scan to the beginning of the next line to realize that the dash is there! You want the line to end with the preceding word, then a space, then the dash, and then the next word after the dash would begin the next line. i.e. you want the dash "attached" to the preceding word, not the following.

Practically, of course, for this particular edit it makes no difference. The word preceding the dash was the very start of a graf, so the chances are just about zero that the line would be broken at either of those spaces (unless the reader has a screen width of about an inch). But the point remains: If you're going to use the nbsp it should be in the correct place. You can also get the desired result with the {{spaced en dash}} template.

Thank you for reading. Jeh ( talk) 06:47, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I have no idea what happened there. It looks like an semi-automated edit, but I have no script that does that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:05, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Maybe something got dropped in from your paste buffer while your text cursor happened to be there? Whatever... sorry for the lecture! Jeh ( talk) 08:22, 5 September 2016 (UTC

The same thing happened to me except the "Phantom" placed them correctly. Debouch ( talk) 20:30, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Wow! I was debating reporting this to Hawkeye7. Now I'm glad I did, but not because Hawkeye7 needs the advice! Were either of you using the Visual Editor? Jeh ( talk) 21:45, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

I was not using the Visual Editor. Debouch ( talk) 22:21, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Me neither. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:29, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

"'Curiouser and curiouser', said Alice." Jeh ( talk) 02:00, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

17:12, 5 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye7,

I have noticed you have edited the Land Warfare Centre page recently and was hoping you could provide some assistance.

I am currently creating a page for the Warrant Officer and Non Commissioned Officer Academy at Canungra. I was hoping you could help me with strategies to get better referencing material as there is limited information on the Academy itself beyond it's history tied to the Land Warfare Centre and its current operations. I have submitted an article twice for review and it is being rejected on lacking reliable and verifiable sources. There is a lack of direct referencing of the Academy in open source mediums.

Could you please provide some advice on how I could get some good information to support this page as the Academy is a significant institution for the Army, particularly for soldiers. Rinkin2016 ( talk) 02:09, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

• ( talk page stalker) FWIW @ AustralianRupert: wrote most of the Land Warfare Centre (Australia) article and I have already asked him to have a look at Draft:Warrant Officer and Non-Commissioned Officer Academy (Australia) to see if he might be able to assist. I've also tried to add references to the draft where I could find them but there does not appear to be much available, hence my concerns about notability. I hope this helps. Anotherclown ( talk) 06:01, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 07:31, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

@ Rinkin2016 and Anotherclown: G'day, I can see a lot of hard work has been put into the WONCO-A article, but to be honest (unfortunately) I don't think it meets Wikipedia's notability guidelines. As stated above there "is a lack of direct referencing of the Academy in open source mediums": that statement drives at the very heart of Wikipedia notability, I'm afraid. Outside of the Army, I suspect few people would have heard of it. Compare that to Kapooka or Duntroon, though, which most likely the average Australian is more likely to have heard of having either seen the ads on television, or met someone who has been there etc. WONCO-A should, in my opinion, be covered in the LWC article. Please don't get me wrong, I know that it is an important part of the Army (I've been posted to, or trained at, Kapooka, Duntroon, LWC, and WONCO-A), but the level of coverage should be commensurate with the level of coverage in open sources. In that regard, I would suggest potentially beefing up the "Structure" section in the Land Warfare Centre (Australia) article, but we need to be careful to be even handed in our coverage of all of its wings. Essentially then, I would suspect that no more than a 3-5 sentence paragraph on each would be sufficient (so long as it is covered by an appropriate reference). Anyway, that is just my opinion. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:44, 6 September 2016 (UTC)

No worries, thanks for the assistance and advice. Will keep looking for better references if they can be found. Might have to roll into the Land Warfare Centre page. Rinkin2016 ( talk) 08:50, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Peacemaker67 and Nick-D on Nazi terror and covert warfare Op-ed: Hawkeye7 looks at Australians on the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

Ahoy! The only criterion Cecil E. Harris doesn't currently meet according to your review is referencing. I am still relatively new to Wikipedia so I was hoping you could give me some pointers on improving the current references. It's hard to clean up the current list because so much is culled from primary sources. Thanks for any suggestions/criticism! Finktron ( talk) 19:57, 7 September 2016 (UTC)

The main lesson is that it's easier to write an article from scratch than to add references later. Each paragraph requires a reference, a source stating where the information came from. This is usually the page number of a book, or a web site. My guess is that much of it is sourced from the war diary, which is apparently on Ancestry.com. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:10, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

There are definitely paragraphs that don't end in citations, but they lead into paragraphs continuing the narrative—and those are referenced accordingly. There are currently 55 unique references in the page; about 40 citations point to a number of different primary sources which include War Diaries and Histories at the squadron, ship, task group and command level, as well as Aircraft Action Reports and other wartime statistical references. Besides these I've included contemporary news sources and Navy magazine links documenting his exploits/citations for valor. There are fewer references from books, I admit, but they do number around 10 citations from 5 distinct works. If you have time, I'd appreciate [citation needed]s where you feel I'm missing documentation. I'm sure everyone on Wikipedia feels this way, but judging from what I've seen, I've gone above and beyond the referencing standards of other B-Class articles even within MilHist. Thanks again for your time. Best Regards, Finktron ( talk) 23:17, 8 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Rosalie Lalonde at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Madalibi ( talk) 13:19, 10 September 2016 (UTC)

On 11 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Sharon Jarvis, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Sharon Jarvis (pictured), Lisa Martin, Katie Umback, and Emma Booth have been selected to represent Australia in para-equestrian at the 2016 Rio Paralympics? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Sharon Jarvis. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

On 11 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Lisa Martin (equestrian), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Sharon Jarvis (pictured), Lisa Martin, Katie Umback, and Emma Booth have been selected to represent Australia in para-equestrian at the 2016 Rio Paralympics? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

On 11 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Katie Umback, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Sharon Jarvis (pictured), Lisa Martin, Katie Umback, and Emma Booth have been selected to represent Australia in para-equestrian at the 2016 Rio Paralympics? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

On 11 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Emma Booth (equestrian), which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Sharon Jarvis (pictured), Lisa Martin, Katie Umback, and Emma Booth have been selected to represent Australia in para-equestrian at the 2016 Rio Paralympics? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 11 September 2016 (UTC)

18:04, 12 September 2016 (UTC)

On 13 September 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Daniel Michel, which you recently nominated. The fact was ... that Daniel Michel (pictured) is the first Australian boccia player selected to compete at the Paralympic Games since 2000? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Daniel Michel. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, daily totals), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 13 September 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, just doing some pre-election tidying up and wanted to check about the operation of Milhist bot and how it works out what number it is up to for a given editor. I was looking at doing some archiving of ?awarded awards? but didn't want to screw up the bot operation. Would it be ok if I archived awards, but left each editor's last award on the awards page for the bot to work off? Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 06:41, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

I am pretty sure that it searches backwards for the last award. To be 100% certain I would have to check the code, and I don't have it here in Rio. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 10:23, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Probably safest to leave it till you get back. Hope you're having a fun time! Great place. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 10:27, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Have fun in Rio, Hawkeye. - Dank ( push to talk) 21:22, 14 September 2016 (UTC)

Thanks guys. Things are very hectic here. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:57, 15 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, if you're back and available, can you advise on this? Once I know, I'll include some instructions somewhere for future reference. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:11, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Okay, the awards are already being archived into Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Awards/ACR/Archive 1, 2 and 3. The Bot starts at the the main pages and then searches backwards through the archives. If we want to add a fourth archive, I have to updatethe Bot. I will do so in a manner that it will recognise new archives in the future. Not that while I am back in Australia, I am not yet back in Canberra. I'm taking a break after the Paralympics in Melbourne. Cheers. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:39, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

It isn't automatic, I last did it manually, creating the third page when I did it. I've now archived page 3 into pages 1 (A-H) and 2 (I-Z), and page 3 is blank. Will it affect the bot if I now delete page 3? Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 01:17, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Yes. The Bot will throw an error when it can't find page 3. It won't then update the ACM, except in those cases where the recipient is found on the main page. Best to leave page 3 empty until I get back, which isn't for another week. I can then tell the Bot to ignore a not found situation. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:18, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

Roger. Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 03:36, 29 September 2016 (UTC)

G'day Hawkeye, let me know when I can delete page 3? Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( click to talk to me) 07:25, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Yes, it can be deleted now. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:10, 19 October 2016 (UTC)

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway, and as a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 23 September. For the Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:01, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Robyn Love, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Athletics. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 09:56, 16 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:01, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

		Four Award
		Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Douglas MacArthur's escape from the Philippines. -- samtar talk or stalk 20:54, 17 September 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 18 September 2016 (UTC)

22:08, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 00:42, 20 September 2016 (UTC)

In response to your inquiry a few weeks ago, I wanted to inform you that thanks to super awesome Analytics team, Massviews now processes up to 5,000 pages (before it was 500), and is about five times as fast :) Here is the last 20 days of pageviews data on all pages in Category:History of the Paralympic movement in Australia articles, taking only around 20 seconds to process.

PS – you've surely heard this before so sorry for the repeat, but if you could kindly archive your talk page to some degree that would be nice! It really slows down my browser :)

Cheers — MusikAnimal ^talk 19:46, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Thank you very much!

PS: I archive my talk page every year whether it needs it or not. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:45, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Gatoclass ( talk) 00:01, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Any help with the Helene Ripa article would be appreciated. regards,-- BabbaQ ( talk) 21:55, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Was it auto-translated from Swedish? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:04, 25 September 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:01, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

18:07, 26 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited 2011 Women's U25 Wheelchair Basketball World Championship, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Helen Freeman. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 12:01, 27 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, was just double-checking the bot's actions re. the Dick Cresswell ACR, which you kindly closed, and for some reason it doesn't seem to have updated the ACM tracking list (although it did for SMS Grier closed at the same time) -- all other steps look to have been executed. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:49, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Very odd. I will investigate. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:43, 28 September 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article John Cockcroft 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 Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 ( talk) 18:20, 30 September 2016 (UTC)

21:30, 3 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. You may be interested in participating in the African Destubathon which starts on October 15. Africa currently has over 37,000 stubs and badly needs a quality improvement editathon/contest to flesh out basic stubs. There are proposed substantial prizes to give to editors who do the most articles, and planned smaller prizes for doing to most destubs for each of the 53 African countries, so should be enjoyable! So it would be a good chance to win something for improving stubs on African sportspeople, including footballers, athletes, Olympians and Paralympians etc, particularly female ones, but also male. Even if contests aren't your thing we would be grateful if you could consider destubbing a few African articles during the drive to help the cause and help reduce the massive 37,000 + stub count, of which many are rated high importance (think Regions of countries etc). If you're interested in competing or just loosely contributing a few expanded articles on African Paralympians, Olympians and committees etc, please add your name to the Contestants/participants section. Diversity of work from a lot of people will make this that bit more special. Thanks. -- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:13, 6 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Swimming at the 2016 Summer Paralympics – Women's 50 metre freestyle S10, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Yi Chen. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot ( talk) 10:59, 7 October 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at recent works Op-ed: TomStar81 on the evolution of the tank Timeline: This month in World War I

20:30, 10 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Kudpung. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Swimming at the 2016 Summer Paralympics – Men's 150 metre individual medley SM3, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, I'm Kudpung. I wanted to let you know that I saw the page you reviewed, Swimming at the 2016 Summer Paralympics – Men's 100 metre breaststroke, and have un-reviewed it again. If you have any questions, please ask them on my talk page. Thank you. Kudpung กุดผึ้ง ( talk) 05:23, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

I know who you are Kudpung. But I didn't review the article or curate it. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 05:32, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of 12 Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period July to September 2016. Thank you for your ongoing support of Wikipedia's reviewing processes. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 12:03, 12 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ernest Titterton 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 Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:20, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Ernest Titterton you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Ernest Titterton for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 04:40, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

The article Ernest Titterton you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ernest Titterton for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 08:41, 15 October 2016 (UTC)

16:42, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi, Hawkeye. I'm just posting to let you know that The class the stars fell on – a list that you have been heavily involved with – has been chosen to appear on the Main Page as Today's featured list for November 11. The TFL blurb can be seen here. If you have any thoughts on the selection, please post them on my talk page or at TFL talk. Regards, Giants2008 ( Talk) 21:17, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Wow! I was looking at it this morning and noticed that it had never been selected. I think it is a great list. The fun bit is clicking on the "rank in class" column and seeing how far down the class order you could be and still be a general. Thanks for that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:03, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

		The WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves
		In recognition of your long term dedication to the Military history WikiProject during your five year tenure as coordinator, please accept the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves as a token of the project's appreciation. Thank you. AustralianRupert ( talk) 08:47, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

The article John Cockcroft you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:John Cockcroft for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hchc2009 -- Hchc2009 ( talk) 16:21, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

Hi mate, a FAC I promoted yesterday, Heavy Metals, was renamed during the nomination and although I fixed a few things I forgot to rename the nomination file name. I've corrected it now but only after FACBot ran on the other noms promoted at the same time. Will it pick it up tomorrow or do we have to run the bot manually on this one? I probably should know the answer but can't recall now... Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:26, 22 October 2016 (UTC)

It should pick it up tomorrow, but I can run it manually. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:31, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

 Done Run successful. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:37, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of Ernest Titterton at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! HaEr48 ( talk) 00:47, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

17:39, 24 October 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:21, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

As a reward for your great job on FACbot, I'd like to offer you another job (heh). On every TFA page (for instance Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 8, 2016), there's a "recentlist" at the bottom. These are a pain to do manually, but I bet someone (you?) could figure out how to generate a script to generate the recentlist one page at a time. It could take the styling (quote marks, italics) from the first words of the previous TFAs, but if that's too hard, it would be a big help if it just added the right links in the right order, and I could add the styling. - Dank ( push to talk) 19:52, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Seems straightforward enough, but I'll have to raise a BRFA. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:41, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

Thanks!! Your call, bot or script. I wouldn't mind just running a script as I create each page. - Dank ( push to talk) 10:55, 26 October 2016 (UTC)

• Bot trial approved — xaosflux ^Talk 11:46, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
  • Okay, I've done Nov 9-12 now, omitting the recentlist template. Feel free to Release The Bot whenever you want to. I'll probably be doing 13-16 today. - Dank ( push to talk) 11:06, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

    Can't get it to work. The Bot has no way to determine what the featured article of the day was for 8 November 2016. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:14, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

    • Does it need to know that? I was thinking it would look for a page in the format "Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 8, 2016", and copy the first link. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:18, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      I have ordered it to do just that; if it can't find the correct page, then it will use the first link in the article. Note that it still uses your formatting. It has updated the three pages for you. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:40, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      Fantastic. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:41, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      I just found out that User:TFA Protector Bot or a related bot may be a big help here. BRB. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:35, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      I was using the same algorithm as the TFA Protector Bot. Namely, I was looking for the page in bold. (And yeah, it doesn't accept templates.) You might want to check that it handles HMS Collingwood correctly. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:46, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      I'm doing that as we speak, I was just looking at its output and noticing it didn't protect that one or Taft. I know what I did wrong now. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:48, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      A better form would have been '''[[HMS Collingwood (1908)|HMS ''Collingwood'']]''' Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:56, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      Yep, just figured that out too, and I can make that work automatically in the future by using that format. One bug-ish report: it doesn't do a good job with "'"[[From The Doctor to my son Thomas]]"'". I bet it would work correctly if I wrote that as "'[[From The Doctor to my son Thomas|"From The Doctor to my son Thomas"]]''', but people would "fix" it if I wrote it that way. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      Another bug report (though I'll happily take these bugs, it still makes my job a lot easier). It looked at '''[[Millipede]]s''' and decided to keep the "s". - Dank ( push to talk) 23:10, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      It's supposed to do that. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:31, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      It depends on what the meaning of "supposed to" is. Recentlist should list the actual names of the articles (but with italics or quote marks as needed). If your bot always produces what comes after the pipe, then it will be wrong sometimes, and that's not a problem, it's still much easier than it was before. But no, I don't want that "s". - Dank ( push to talk) 23:39, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

      No worries. All fixed. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:51, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Great, I'll be scheduling a lot of articles soon, so we'll have more output to look at. Thanks again. - Dank ( push to talk) 01:09, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

We can update the creation template ( Template:TFA preload) so it does not insert the recent list. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:20, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Done. - Dank ( push to talk) 01:30, 28 October 2016 (UTC)

Okay, I'm finished fiddling with things for the moment through the 18th, if you want to run the bot again. In other news, WP:TFARP had Fermi penciled in for the 28th. I'm about to propose articles for the rest of the month to Brian and Chris, but I don't think I can run with Fermi on the 28th, because I've only got 2 sports articles with a date connection for the month, and one of them is on the 28th. Fermi is a great article and I'll run it before too long if Chris doesn't beat me to it. - Dank ( push to talk) 23:19, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

The Bot has updated the latest lot. Let me know if there are any problems. Note that you do not have to create the entries in chronological order; the Bot will fill them in when it has the previous three days. From now on it will run at 0046Z, and I'll be checking the output. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:06, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Outstanding. It missed the italics on Vampire. It doesn't look right to me to lowercase "bluebuck", and we haven't done that before, I think. If this helps, I always provide the correct article title, capitalized, in the TFAFULL template. (Of course, I can do by hand whatever it doesn't do.) - Dank ( push to talk) 01:49, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Do you want it to capitalise the first letter? I've changed it to do that, and to italicise Mughal-e-Azam and Vampire: The Masquerade – Bloodlines Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:42, 30 October 2016 (UTC)

Bug report: Art LaPella fixed the italics yesterday ... you can stalk his contribs to see what he did. The only other thing I see is that the bot listed "Hurricane Kate" (it's Hurricane Kate (1985)) and "Keith Miller" (the article title is much longer). I'll fix those now. - Dank ( push to talk) 13:57, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Fixed the italics. Hurricane Kate is more interesting. When do you want the real title, and when do you want the piped one? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:45, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks! Always the real title. FWIW, the real title is repeated just before the recentlist. - Dank ( push to talk) 20:47, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

 Done Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:03, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

16:18, 31 October 2016 (UTC)

The final round of the 2016 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2016 WikiCup top three finalists:

• First Place - Cas Liber ( submissions)
• Second Place - MPJ-DK ( submissions)
• Third Place - Adam Cuerden ( submissions)

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

• Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a three-way tie with themselves for two FAs in each of R2, R3, and R5).
• Good Article – MPJ-DK had 14 GAs promoted in R3.
• Featured List – Calvin999 ( submissions) produced 2 FLs in R2
• Featured Pictures – Adam Cuerden restored 18 images to FP status in R4.
• Featured Portal – SSTflyer ( submissions) produced the only FPO of the Cup in R2.
• Featured Topic – Cyclonebiskit ( submissions) and Calvin were each responsible for one FT in R3 and R2, respectively.
• Good Topic – MPJ-DK created a GT with 9 GAs in R5.
• Did You Know – MPJ-DK put 53 DYKs on the main page in R4.
• In The News – Dharmadhyaksha ( submissions) and Muboshgu ( submissions), each with 5 ITN, both in R4.
• Good Article Review – MPJ-DK completed 61 GARs in R2.

Over the course of the 2016 WikiCup the following content was added to Wikipedia (only reporting on fixed value categories): 17 Featured Articles, 183 Good Articles, 8 Featured Lists, 87 Featured Pictures, 40 In The News, and 321 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:53, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2017 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email), Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email)

Hello Hawkeye7. I just nominated this article: Game of Thrones(See: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Game of Thrones/archive1). And I would truly apreciate if you have time, could you have a look and maybe give some comments. Thanks. - AffeL ( talk) 22:43, 2 November 2016 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles's 2016-2017 GA Cup Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 4th GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been three GA Cups, which were successful in reaching our goals of significantly reducing the traditionally long queue at GAN, so we're doing it again. Currently, there are over 400 nominations listed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 4th GA Cup will begin on November 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on February 28, 2017), but this may change based on participant numbers. We may take a break in December for the holidays, depending on the results of a poll of our participants taken shortly after the competition begins. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same, as will the scoring. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on November 14, 2016. Everyone is welcome to join; new and old editors, so sign-up now! If you have any questions, take a look at the FAQ page and/or contact one of the judges. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. We apologize for the delay in sending out this message until after the competition has started. Thank you to Krishna Chaitanya Velaga for aiding in getting this message out. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to our mailing list. If you are a participant, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.

-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 01:40, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

		The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds
		On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am hereby award you the A-class medal with diamonds for your efforts in promoting the articles on Metallurgical Laboratory, Montreal Laboratory, and K-25 to A-Class standard. Well done! Iazyges Consermonor Opus meum 02:49, 3 November 2016 (UTC)

You may interested in this GTRC about a topic you were involved in promoting. —  Yellow Dingo  (talk) 05:13, 5 November 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 00:02, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Your bot task #4 has been approved. Happy editing, — xaosflux ^Talk 01:47, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

(Sound of Champaign corks popping) Hawkeye7 ( talk) 02:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

While you're in a celebratory mood ... did you see the two tasks I mentioned on Chris's talk page at "two new FACBot-generated pages"? Chris emailed me to say he's enthusiastic about this, if someone can get it running. The first one would I think be simply copying the task that creates WP:FANMP, and skipping the alphabetizing part, so that the results are grouped first by category (Milhist etc.) then by year. The second page would subtract out the articles that appear at WP:FADC ... or if it would be easier, I could subtract those out by hand, and then when someone wants to add something to FADC, they could add it to a special page that the bot is watching, and the bot would simultaneously add the entry to FADC and subtract it from the new page. Thoughts? - Dank ( push to talk) 03:35, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Take your time ... in another couple of days, I'll start asking around for help with this, sorry to give you so much at once. - Dank ( push to talk) 17:24, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

It's okay. I had to first remind myself of how this was done. Wikipedia:Featured articles is added to manually; the Bot removes each one as it appears as TFA. Then it regenerates Wikipedia:Featured articles that haven't been on the Main Page. So now I need to generate two more pages:

1. A page like WP:FANMP, but with articles sorted by date of approval;
2. A page like the previous one, but with the FADC articles removed.

I think I can do this. I will work on it tomorrow. Do you have proposed names for the two pages? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 05:54, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Not sorting would be fine, just adding them to the end within their category. If I need to manually add the year markers (which would be fine), then I don't know what the sort operation would do with those, it might make a mess. I can't think of names at the moment, I'll still recovering from the election. - Dank ( push to talk) 10:27, 9 November 2016 (UTC)

Sorting is the easy part. A sample of the generated first page can be found at User:Hawkeye7/Sandbox5 Hawkeye7 ( talk) 22:16, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

Chris, there are different formats you and the new guys might want to consider. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:32, 10 November 2016 (UTC)

A sample of the second page can be found at User:Hawkeye7/Sandbox6 Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:35, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

• Would it be possible to link the articles? —  Chris Woodrich ( talk) 11:58, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

  Of course. I have re-generated the sandboxes with the pages linked. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:13, 17 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Project Y you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 06:21, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	For your work on Leclerc. Buckshot06 (talk) 13:09, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

Gosh, that was a while ago. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 20:44, 6 November 2016 (UTC)

— Maile ( talk) 00:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at two new books on the US military Interview: A chat with our new project coordinators Review essay: Nick-D discusses recent works on the British and Australian Armies in World War I Op-ed: TomStar81 on the end of the Battle of the Somme Timeline: This month in World War I

23:01, 7 November 2016 (UTC)

Problem with closing of Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of National Defence Academy alumni. Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga ( talk • mail) 10:19, 8 November 2016 (UTC)

Y Resolved. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:43, 11 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Project Y you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Project Y for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 04:01, 12 November 2016 (UTC)

19:17, 14 November 2016 (UTC)

This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. It's about GreenC bot. Me-123567-Me ( talk) 21:55, 15 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, some time ago you had expressed interest in taking over the operation and maintenance of User:VeblenBot, which handles many of the day to day functions of Peer Review. Are you still interested? If so, please see here. In any case, thanks for your all you do here, and for your time, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:03, 20 November 2016 (UTC)

15:33, 21 November 2016 (UTC)

re: [314]. It is an argument for him being the first Polish Nobel Peace prize laurate. It argues in the second half that JR can be seen as a Pole as until his death he spoke fluent Polish, stressed that he has ties to Poland, calling himself a Pole with a British passport, and disliked when his first name was anglicized as Joseph instead of Polish Jozef. Regarding source reliablility, the website is maintained by Polish Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The author, Bartłomiej Kozłowski, Bartłomiej Kozłowski, does not appear to be notable. -- _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 08:46, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. I wanted to be sure. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 21:38, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bruno Pontecorvo 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 Wizardman -- Wizardman ( talk) 15:01, 24 November 2016 (UTC)

The article S-1 Executive Committee you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:S-1 Executive Committee for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 ( talk) 09:41, 25 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wilhelm D. Styer 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 Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 08:21, 26 November 2016 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Joseph Rotblat you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D ( talk) 05:43, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Joseph Rotblat you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Joseph Rotblat for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Nick-D -- Nick-D ( talk) 11:02, 27 November 2016 (UTC)

21:16, 28 November 2016 (UTC)

The article Bruno Pontecorvo you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bruno Pontecorvo for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman ( talk) 15:21, 4 December 2016 (UTC)

18:07, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your nomination! I never expected editing Vietnam War Stubs would be so rewarding. Enjoy a beer on me. Cheers! --- acfrue "clink!" 18:37, 5 December 2016 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at America's nuclear capability at the start of the Cold War Review essay: Hawkeye7 on the Manhatten Project suite of articles Op-ed: TomStar81 discusses leadership changes in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

The article Wilhelm D. Styer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wilhelm D. Styer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose ( talk) 12:41, 9 December 2016 (UTC)

Thank you for your help thus far. Do you have any interest in working with me to try to get it to GA? Would be one more Mercury 7 astronaut down for the Good Topic.

Also, do you know of any way for me to advertise or otherwise generate better participation for the Adopt an Astronaut task force for Wikiproject Spaceflight? It is just me working on those articles, and I am mostly trying to prevent what just happened (notable astronaut passes away, article in poor shape). Let me know if you have any thoughts there either. Cheers! Kees08 ( talk) 19:04, 10 December 2016 (UTC)

19:29, 12 December 2016 (UTC)

On 1 January 2017, WikiCup 2017 (the 10th Annual WikiCup) will begin. This year we are trying something a little different – monetary prizes.

For the WC2017 the prizes will be as follows (amounts are based in US$ and will be awarded in the form of an online Amazon gift certificate):

• First place – $200
• Second & Third place – $50 each
• Category prizes – $25 per category (which will be limited to FA, FL, FP, GA, and DYK for 2017). Winning a category prize does not require making it to the final round.

Note: Monetary prizes are a one-year experiment for 2017 and may or may not be continued in the future. In order to be eligible to receive any of the prizes above, the competing Wikipedia account must have a valid/active email address.

After two years as a WikiCup judge, Figureskatingfan is stepping down. We thank her for her contributions as a WikiCup judge. We are pleased to announce that our newest judge is two-time WikiCup champion Cwmhiraeth.

The judges for the 2017 WikiCup are Godot13 ( talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth ( talk · contribs), and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email).

Signups are open now and will remain open until 5 February 2017. You can sign up here.

If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 20:02, 14 December 2016 (UTC)

• Hi Hawkeye. I just wanted to let you know that the Montreal Laboratory article has been scheduled as today's featured article for December 29, 2016. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 29, 2016. Thanks! —  Chris Woodrich ( talk) 02:21, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

  I have trimmed it to meet the work limits. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 03:39, 16 December 2016 (UTC)

  Great, thanks! —  Chris Woodrich ( talk) 06:25, 17 December 2016 (UTC)

20:33, 19 December 2016 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye7. Regarding your Triple Crown nomination, can you please provide DYK credits in the relevant section? For an example see Imzadi1979's nomination here [330]. You can link to either recieving the credit on your talk page like he has, or linking to the original nomination. It would take too much time for me to search for all the DYK credits manually. Imzadi1979 has also gone to the trouble of providing credits for his GA and Featured content, however, while this is nice it is not necessary as far as i'm concerned as it's quite easy to check who nominated a GA or piece of featured content, in comparison to checking a DYK credit anyway. Cheers. Freikorp ( talk) 08:07, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Done, but note that it is for the Timeless crown. The DYKs will not have changed of course, so you only have to check that the GAs and FAs have retained their status. (I normally keep all the DYK records here). Have you thought of writing a script? Hawkeye7 ( talk) 23:24, 20 December 2016 (UTC)

Oh right, sorry I overlooked that. Thanks for linking the other stuff anyway, it was helpful in verifying everything, which I have now done. So anyway I haven't processed a lot of Timeless triple crown's for more than one GA/FA set, so considering you have 15 sets are you happy for the award to say it is a Timeless Alexander the Great Triple Crown with the regular Timeless image? Freikorp ( talk) 00:52, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, that would be fine. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 09:15, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 00:02, 21 December 2016 (UTC)

-- Rubbish computer ( HALP!: I dropped the bass?) 19:14, 22 December 2016 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Clinton Engineer Works article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 6 January 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 6, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie ( talk - contribs - library) 01:46, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

I've trimmed it back to the required length. Odd that you chose the lie detector image. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 06:30, 23 December 2016 (UTC)

From the icy Canajian north; to you and yours! FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 21:51, 26 December 2016 (UTC)

Winnipeg eh? Merry Christmas! Hawkeye7 ( talk) 00:06, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

	Here's some Poutine
	Thanks for your hard work on the Montreal Laboratory and for letting me discover some hidden history of my home city! Tinss ( talk) 01:21, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

Time is running out to voting for the Military Historian and Newcomer of the year! If you have not yet cast a vote, please consider doing so soon. The voting will end on 31 December at 23:59 UTC, with the presentation of the awards to the winners and runners up to occur on 1 January 2017. For the Military history WikiProject Coordinators, MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:02, 29 December 2016 (UTC)

This message was sent as a courtesy reminder to all active members of the Military History WikiProject.