![]() | This 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. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |
Since I head back to school Monday I thought I would scribble out a few ideas I had over my long week off and see if there was any interest in them.
These are merely ideas, but I thought I'd throw them out there and see what everyone thinks. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I set up a preliminary draft for working groups here. Hope it helps newcomers grasp the concepts. I'm hoping for some input so we can work out the details before I become too encompassed in schoolwork to put in more wiki-work :)
FYI - I've set up a work group for work on "large cruisers" (right name? :/) here. Comments would be appreciated! — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 04:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
← Here's a first attempt:
I'd like to put in some more useful code for the worklist, at a minimum, before we deploy this. Any other suggestions for what should be included on the preloaded working group page would be appreciated. Kirill [pf] 00:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
In theory we could create a link to a general working page at the academy, but that would require retooling the basic draft sitting in my sandbox. That may be something to think about. If I think about it long enough I'm sure I could come up with some other code to add if given enough time, but it appears that I will be tied up with school work for the rest of today. It is a good start though, and I thank you all for helping me out with this part; like I said above, my technical expertise just was not quite up to the game. TomStar81 ( Talk) 15:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've made some updates to the preload template. The worklist table should be able to double as a useful listing of participants via the involved editor listing for each article. Thoughts? Kirill [talk] [pf] 00:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I guiny-pigged my working group for moving so I could offer some feedback in relation to the current template and any changes we may need to make. The first thing I noticed is that it did not copy exactly: WikiProject Military history/Maritime warfare task force/Iowa class battleship featured topic is where Iowa FT working is now, but the link at the top is out and the page should display that small blue link to return to the task force but doesn't. We may need to devlope moving instructions to address this problem.
The other hting I would suggest is adding to the preload template a section titled open tasks so that those just checking in can see what the editors in the group are doing. My page had one before the change, now that its gone the page looks a little...vacant. One other thing we haven;t discussed either is how the talk pages will function here: should the be marked as milhist talk pages, redirected to the task force page, or just left alone? TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Just letting all of you know that I am now joining Tom in taking a break to prepare for final exams. I will still check my talk page at least once a day and am still reachable via email. I will be back in full force on 15 May. - MBK 004 23:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Just an update, although my notice says that I should be back today, I am going to take a few extra days off since the exams this semester were much more stressful and if any of you have noticed the infobox here, my birthday is coming up within 24 hours. I'll be back once the weekend is done. - MBK 004 18:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
As a quick note, this indefinetly blocked editor continues to attempt to evade their block and add uncited or dubiously cited material on casualties in ongoing wars. They appear to have given up on sock puppet accounts (a list of which is at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Top Gun) and are using IP addresses (I've started a list of addresses at: User:Top Gun). In the last couple of weeks I've blocked two sock puppet accounts and four IP addresses which were being used by this guy. Nick-D ( talk) 05:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
A relatively minor suggestion, but I'm thinking it might be worth instituting a 3rd Place in the monthly article-writing contest, partly because patronage seems large enough to justify it, and partly because the competition for 2nd and 3rd might encourage still more interest, given that 1st place is generally a forgone conclusion...! Even just naming 3rd Place in the monthly newsletter, an Honourable Mention as it were, would probably suffice if we don't want to go the effort of an additional barnstar. Thoughts? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Bryce's suggestion that we should award a third-place medal if the gap between second and third is close if a very good one. It hasn't happened though, I see, for the April contest. Perhaps May's will be different? Roger Davies talk 05:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Because local school officials in my area have closed schools for an extended period of time in response to several cases of swine flu in the area, I will not be able to edit or contribute as regularly as is usual through mid-May. A coworker of my spouse and her daughter have tested positive for Type A influenza, but they won't know if it's actually the H1N1 variety or not until results come back from the CDC lab. No one in my family (myself included) has any signs of the illness, so all are well for now. I'll try to be around as much as I am able, but wanted to let everyone know why the variability. — Bellhalla ( talk) 12:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
(←) Thank you for all of the kind words and thoughts. Everyone here was healthy and remained so. But, now that the schools are back open, I declare myself back from my semi-break :) — Bellhalla ( talk) 18:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I've received the following:
I have no strong feelings on this either way. What do we think? Roger Davies talk 10:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a question: MisterBee has gone and nominated the aformentioned lists for ACR despite the fact that they are already rated as FLs; is this possible/plausable/allowed? It's the same as someone nominating an article for A-Class despite the fact that it is already a Featured Article. Thoughts/comments? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 05:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
This has, incidentally, been brought up at WT:MILHIST#Question?, which may be a good opportunity to get feedback from the project as a whole if we need it at this point. Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Why should we keep track of the nominators? Why not just have people nominate themselves for it, linking the three articles and the three FACs in the nom? (Similar to WP:TRIPLE and WP:FOUR) — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 05:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
(out-dent) Personally, I don't see much of a need for a Featred Article award. We are becoming too award orientated within the project, and I believe our awards and awards systems are adequated at present. If we branch out into an FA award, then people might well just wish to skip A-Class or go for both awards. If we expand out of the project's ratings to FA, then are we going to adopt an award for GA? If anything, I think it might be worth monitoring FA contributions and awarding the Featured Article Medal to those who are eligable for it instead. Just my opinion, though. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 04:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Following on from the very interesting discussion above, it might help focus thoughts and develop consensus if we see where consensus lies on some of the underlying principles. This is not a vote so brief comments please. Roger Davies talk 04:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Medals and barnstars help motivate editors by providing recognition for their efforts and thus improve our pool of featured content.
A generic featured article medal exists but does not apply to all featured content.
A Milhist-specific featured content medal will help motivate editors to produce Milhist featured content.
Milhist A-class criteria are a less stringent version of the featured content criteria and therefore featured content automatically meets A-class requirements.
It is practical to set up a tracking mechanism to enable automatic awarding of featured content medals.
A pertinent case-in-point: I've just assessed Enigma machine, which is a delisted FA. With no record of a milhist ACR I had to give it a B-Class. EyeSerene talk 11:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible to modify the article alert box to visually announce when an ACR or PR can be closed? Like have the text in the box bold or italic or change color or something of that nature? It would reduce the amount of closable PR and ACR messages here and on the milhist pages if we coordinators could see at a glance which reviews could be closed. TomStar81 ( Talk) 21:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
We appear to have acquired a new task force overnight. I'm one of the coordinators; anyone like to volunteer to be the other? Roger Davies talk 11:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
How about this FP for the icon/logo/whatever we needed for it? We aren't going to get something that involves all parts of Milhist, and this photo is as iconic as a photo can get. — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 04:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Some time back there was a suggestion to implement a project motto, and we ultimately concluded that at the project level we would be unable to gather consensus for a motto that did not seem to give undo weight to a particular country or service branch. Although this idea failed at the project level, I think it may work at the task force level. If members of a task force can agree to a implementing a motto and if no one raises any reasonable objections, I would suggest allowing mottoes to be introduced at the task force for those task forces wishing to implement them; however, since the original idea failed, I thought I would suggest this here first and see what the rest of you think about the idea.
I have to admit, I've been feeling guilty about this for a few weeks, but RL has constantly been getting into the way. I've not been hugely active on wiki for the past...well, at least a month, and I've also found it difficult to do any Coordinator jobs, as y'all seem to get there first or do a better job. I'm feeling kinda extraneous at the moment, and therefore I'm wondering whether I should give up being a Coordinator; I'd say resign, but that's rather dramatic, and it's not like I'm an Admin or anything. What does anyone else think? Skinny87 ( talk) 17:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
First off, in response to Skinny above, stay ... just because you haven't done much means that you should resign. Listen to everyone that has chimed in. Now, as most of you know, I have just finished the school semester (I did extremely well for those who wonder) and took some extra time off to decompress as well as celebrate my 21st birthday. Now that I am ready to return to my work, my computer decided to stop working. I have been advised by the experts that my laptop has suffered a severe failure and I must completely re-install Windows. Since doing so would mean I would loose all of my data (including two articles that I have been working on for over a year including one for the Iowa class FT, all of my music in iTunes and most of the assignments I have completed throughout three years of university). Accordingly, I am sending my computer off to these people: DriveSavers since they were recommended by the manufacturer. I have no clue when I will be back since I will still have to deal with the issue at hand with my laptop once I recover the data. I am still reachable via email and I have this alternate account but won't be able to do much for the foreseeable future. Also, would someone with admin rights please change the wikibreak notice on my userpage and talk page accordingly since I cannot do so with this alternate account (I do not want to log in with my admin account on a public computer or my iPhone). Thanks, and I'll be in touch... - MBK 004 on the iPhone 02:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
←It has positively been determined that I suffered a hard drive failure. Since my laptop is still under warranty, I am getting a new one free of charge, but I am still out of pocket for the data recovery. The timeline for this is about two weeks for me to send off my computer for data recovery and then time for the new hard drive to be installed as well as the re-installation of the OS. Then I will have a few weeks of getting everything back to normal, since I've had this computer for three years I have customized so many settings it is almost like I just got a new computer and will have to do it all over again. I really did not want a involuntary two week vacation after I took a voluntary six week one... - MBK 004 on the iPhone 16:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
←Time for an update. Just heard back from DriveSavers, they think they have successfully recovered everything from the drive. Of course, that is for me to discern or not once I receive the data back, but I am optimistic. I should receive my computer back early next week, and then it will take me a few days to complete the replacement of the drive as well as the reinstall of the OS and re-integration of my data. Look for my return in about seven days from now if everything happens according to schedule (I should not be away for longer than a week and a half at the most) - MBK 004 on the iPhone 21:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I will be here on an on again off again basis for the next ten or so days; I'm trying to get back into summer school but in this case that requires a few placement exams, and those are long and difficult (and boring, honestly) and unfortunately necessary. In addition, I'm trying to dig up info on Able Archer 83 and that has been time consuming as well. Just so you all know. TomStar81 ( Talk) 03:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
The North Korean nuclear weapons test just got more disturbing: news reports are claiming that the North Korean leader has renounced the 1953 cease fire, and with this move I fear that we end up with some level of combat before the whole thing sorts itself out. I post this here because the renounces cease fire will undoubtedly prompt people to look into the North and South Korean military articles, and as we all know from our main page experiences higher traffic almost always equals higher vandalism. Therefore, I would ask that those who have the time and the inclination please keep tabs on the North Korean and South Korean armed forces articles, as well as the Korean War articles, so we can monitor the information there and move to protect the pages if things seem to be getting out of hand. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Commenting on the war, not the articles: oh boy. Things could get rather interesting rather quickly... — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 02:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
A concerned editor has just bought to my attention an editing dispute occuring at Second Sino-Japanese War, which has led to User:Nihonjoe protecting the page for seven days begining on 27 May. It appears to have come about by the removal of the Communist Chinese forces from the infobox. As I have little knowledge in the area, I felt it best to announce here. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 08:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi all. I just wanted to note that I am getting extremely stressed and annoyed with Wikipedia at the moment, so I feel a wikibreak is likely to be imminent. I don't think I have ever felt this shitty in regards to Wikipedia, nor this distressed since I was suffering from severe anxiety and depression a few years ago. I will probably be cutting down my editing over the next few days, but may still be on a bit to monitor my current FAC. Just thought I should let you all know. Sorry guys. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 06:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to announce you that it seems I'll be in tone with the current inactivity period (which is BTW, the project's worst since I'm around) and it is likely that I will not be contributing until tuesday. However, I have closed today few ACRs and created the monthly newsletter so I hope that my absence would not be even noticed. All the best, -- Eurocopter ( talk) 10:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
To go along with the two break announcements above, I will be going sailing from tomorrow to sometime around Monday the 15th. After that, I'll return for a few days before going away for another week, after which I'll return for a few days and go away for two weeks. Sorry for all this time away. I'll try to check in periodically for some of the time, if I can steal someone's wifi. – Joe N 14:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Guys, not available to sort this myself due RL commitments but the May contest results in the latest Bugle are in fact April's - doesn't look like anyone's added up the May contest entries following Bryce and I allocating the points a few days ago - any volunteers to fix? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I was researching the matter of article maintaining such as would be the case through the {{ maintained}} template, and happened to find User:Richard001/Maintenance. Half way down the page Richard proposed an interesting idea for article maintenance:
It is very important that such maintainers be identifiable, otherwise nobody knows whether a page is even being maintained. I think the best place for this is the talk page. At the moment we have the imperfect {{ maintained}}, which boxes the maintainer into a specific role that they may not want (and hence they'll avoid using the template). Multiple versions are needed so that the template can accurately describe the role of the maintainer(s). The message could also be conveyed via WikiProject banners, e.g. |maintainer = [User name] to produce 'This article is maintained by User:XYZ' or 'This article is being maintained [show details]'.
Maintainers may not want to 'advertise' so boldly, though I can't think of any simple way to avoid this. Other arrangements can be imagined, and as long as there is a way for people to tell whether an article is maintained (and if so by who) they can achieve the same purpose as a talk page notice, though people who are not 'in the know' may find this information more difficult to find.
The part about adding such coding to a project banner strikes me as something worth proposing, if we could do for this maintained idea what we did for the portal idea then we could subtly advertise that an article is being maintained and to what capacity it is being maintained without using the big maintained template, for example:
|maintained1-name=username/working group
|maintained1-area=citations/copyediting/factuality
Thoughts? TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
If two or more working groups are operating together toward a greater goal could we create a template to facilitate easier movement between them? In time I am hoping to create the single largest FT covering the entirety of US Navy battleships, but at the moment my similarly run Iowa and South Dakota class battleship working groups are not linked on any common template, and I wanted to ask about matter like this before moving to address the issue. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Hartfelt ( talk · contribs) has an A-class nomination up, his first ever, that has drawn very few comments. I've helped him with the article prior to the nomination, and he left me a message regarding the few comments, wondering what would happen if the article "fails to draw much comment". I feel kind of bad... :-/ Could someone else (I've already supported) take a swipe at reviewing? The links are Army of the Tennessee and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Army of the Tennessee. Thanks, — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 00:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to add a link to the academy to the welcome to our project template? From where I sit, as the academy was intended to aid those in the project, and those new to it need the most aid, it would be a good way of providing assistance to the new users within the project. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
![]() | This 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. |
Archive 15 | ← | Archive 19 | Archive 20 | Archive 21 | Archive 22 | Archive 23 | → | Archive 25 |
Since I head back to school Monday I thought I would scribble out a few ideas I had over my long week off and see if there was any interest in them.
These are merely ideas, but I thought I'd throw them out there and see what everyone thinks. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:32, 21 March 2009 (UTC)
I set up a preliminary draft for working groups here. Hope it helps newcomers grasp the concepts. I'm hoping for some input so we can work out the details before I become too encompassed in schoolwork to put in more wiki-work :)
FYI - I've set up a work group for work on "large cruisers" (right name? :/) here. Comments would be appreciated! — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 04:12, 31 March 2009 (UTC)
← Here's a first attempt:
I'd like to put in some more useful code for the worklist, at a minimum, before we deploy this. Any other suggestions for what should be included on the preloaded working group page would be appreciated. Kirill [pf] 00:19, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
In theory we could create a link to a general working page at the academy, but that would require retooling the basic draft sitting in my sandbox. That may be something to think about. If I think about it long enough I'm sure I could come up with some other code to add if given enough time, but it appears that I will be tied up with school work for the rest of today. It is a good start though, and I thank you all for helping me out with this part; like I said above, my technical expertise just was not quite up to the game. TomStar81 ( Talk) 15:51, 13 April 2009 (UTC)
Okay, I've made some updates to the preload template. The worklist table should be able to double as a useful listing of participants via the involved editor listing for each article. Thoughts? Kirill [talk] [pf] 00:18, 26 April 2009 (UTC)
I guiny-pigged my working group for moving so I could offer some feedback in relation to the current template and any changes we may need to make. The first thing I noticed is that it did not copy exactly: WikiProject Military history/Maritime warfare task force/Iowa class battleship featured topic is where Iowa FT working is now, but the link at the top is out and the page should display that small blue link to return to the task force but doesn't. We may need to devlope moving instructions to address this problem.
The other hting I would suggest is adding to the preload template a section titled open tasks so that those just checking in can see what the editors in the group are doing. My page had one before the change, now that its gone the page looks a little...vacant. One other thing we haven;t discussed either is how the talk pages will function here: should the be marked as milhist talk pages, redirected to the task force page, or just left alone? TomStar81 ( Talk) 19:43, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
Just letting all of you know that I am now joining Tom in taking a break to prepare for final exams. I will still check my talk page at least once a day and am still reachable via email. I will be back in full force on 15 May. - MBK 004 23:33, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
Just an update, although my notice says that I should be back today, I am going to take a few extra days off since the exams this semester were much more stressful and if any of you have noticed the infobox here, my birthday is coming up within 24 hours. I'll be back once the weekend is done. - MBK 004 18:35, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
As a quick note, this indefinetly blocked editor continues to attempt to evade their block and add uncited or dubiously cited material on casualties in ongoing wars. They appear to have given up on sock puppet accounts (a list of which is at Category:Wikipedia sockpuppets of Top Gun) and are using IP addresses (I've started a list of addresses at: User:Top Gun). In the last couple of weeks I've blocked two sock puppet accounts and four IP addresses which were being used by this guy. Nick-D ( talk) 05:52, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
A relatively minor suggestion, but I'm thinking it might be worth instituting a 3rd Place in the monthly article-writing contest, partly because patronage seems large enough to justify it, and partly because the competition for 2nd and 3rd might encourage still more interest, given that 1st place is generally a forgone conclusion...! Even just naming 3rd Place in the monthly newsletter, an Honourable Mention as it were, would probably suffice if we don't want to go the effort of an additional barnstar. Thoughts? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 07:15, 25 April 2009 (UTC)
Bryce's suggestion that we should award a third-place medal if the gap between second and third is close if a very good one. It hasn't happened though, I see, for the April contest. Perhaps May's will be different? Roger Davies talk 05:03, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Because local school officials in my area have closed schools for an extended period of time in response to several cases of swine flu in the area, I will not be able to edit or contribute as regularly as is usual through mid-May. A coworker of my spouse and her daughter have tested positive for Type A influenza, but they won't know if it's actually the H1N1 variety or not until results come back from the CDC lab. No one in my family (myself included) has any signs of the illness, so all are well for now. I'll try to be around as much as I am able, but wanted to let everyone know why the variability. — Bellhalla ( talk) 12:53, 29 April 2009 (UTC)
(←) Thank you for all of the kind words and thoughts. Everyone here was healthy and remained so. But, now that the schools are back open, I declare myself back from my semi-break :) — Bellhalla ( talk) 18:40, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
I've received the following:
I have no strong feelings on this either way. What do we think? Roger Davies talk 10:30, 1 May 2009 (UTC)
Just a question: MisterBee has gone and nominated the aformentioned lists for ACR despite the fact that they are already rated as FLs; is this possible/plausable/allowed? It's the same as someone nominating an article for A-Class despite the fact that it is already a Featured Article. Thoughts/comments? Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 05:14, 3 May 2009 (UTC)
This has, incidentally, been brought up at WT:MILHIST#Question?, which may be a good opportunity to get feedback from the project as a whole if we need it at this point. Kirill [talk] [pf] 13:46, 5 May 2009 (UTC)
Why should we keep track of the nominators? Why not just have people nominate themselves for it, linking the three articles and the three FACs in the nom? (Similar to WP:TRIPLE and WP:FOUR) — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 05:35, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
(out-dent) Personally, I don't see much of a need for a Featred Article award. We are becoming too award orientated within the project, and I believe our awards and awards systems are adequated at present. If we branch out into an FA award, then people might well just wish to skip A-Class or go for both awards. If we expand out of the project's ratings to FA, then are we going to adopt an award for GA? If anything, I think it might be worth monitoring FA contributions and awarding the Featured Article Medal to those who are eligable for it instead. Just my opinion, though. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 04:14, 7 May 2009 (UTC)
Following on from the very interesting discussion above, it might help focus thoughts and develop consensus if we see where consensus lies on some of the underlying principles. This is not a vote so brief comments please. Roger Davies talk 04:52, 8 May 2009 (UTC)
Medals and barnstars help motivate editors by providing recognition for their efforts and thus improve our pool of featured content.
A generic featured article medal exists but does not apply to all featured content.
A Milhist-specific featured content medal will help motivate editors to produce Milhist featured content.
Milhist A-class criteria are a less stringent version of the featured content criteria and therefore featured content automatically meets A-class requirements.
It is practical to set up a tracking mechanism to enable automatic awarding of featured content medals.
A pertinent case-in-point: I've just assessed Enigma machine, which is a delisted FA. With no record of a milhist ACR I had to give it a B-Class. EyeSerene talk 11:36, 13 May 2009 (UTC)
Would it be possible to modify the article alert box to visually announce when an ACR or PR can be closed? Like have the text in the box bold or italic or change color or something of that nature? It would reduce the amount of closable PR and ACR messages here and on the milhist pages if we coordinators could see at a glance which reviews could be closed. TomStar81 ( Talk) 21:56, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
We appear to have acquired a new task force overnight. I'm one of the coordinators; anyone like to volunteer to be the other? Roger Davies talk 11:21, 10 May 2009 (UTC)
How about this FP for the icon/logo/whatever we needed for it? We aren't going to get something that involves all parts of Milhist, and this photo is as iconic as a photo can get. — Ed 17 (Talk / Contribs) 04:13, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
Some time back there was a suggestion to implement a project motto, and we ultimately concluded that at the project level we would be unable to gather consensus for a motto that did not seem to give undo weight to a particular country or service branch. Although this idea failed at the project level, I think it may work at the task force level. If members of a task force can agree to a implementing a motto and if no one raises any reasonable objections, I would suggest allowing mottoes to be introduced at the task force for those task forces wishing to implement them; however, since the original idea failed, I thought I would suggest this here first and see what the rest of you think about the idea.
I have to admit, I've been feeling guilty about this for a few weeks, but RL has constantly been getting into the way. I've not been hugely active on wiki for the past...well, at least a month, and I've also found it difficult to do any Coordinator jobs, as y'all seem to get there first or do a better job. I'm feeling kinda extraneous at the moment, and therefore I'm wondering whether I should give up being a Coordinator; I'd say resign, but that's rather dramatic, and it's not like I'm an Admin or anything. What does anyone else think? Skinny87 ( talk) 17:16, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
First off, in response to Skinny above, stay ... just because you haven't done much means that you should resign. Listen to everyone that has chimed in. Now, as most of you know, I have just finished the school semester (I did extremely well for those who wonder) and took some extra time off to decompress as well as celebrate my 21st birthday. Now that I am ready to return to my work, my computer decided to stop working. I have been advised by the experts that my laptop has suffered a severe failure and I must completely re-install Windows. Since doing so would mean I would loose all of my data (including two articles that I have been working on for over a year including one for the Iowa class FT, all of my music in iTunes and most of the assignments I have completed throughout three years of university). Accordingly, I am sending my computer off to these people: DriveSavers since they were recommended by the manufacturer. I have no clue when I will be back since I will still have to deal with the issue at hand with my laptop once I recover the data. I am still reachable via email and I have this alternate account but won't be able to do much for the foreseeable future. Also, would someone with admin rights please change the wikibreak notice on my userpage and talk page accordingly since I cannot do so with this alternate account (I do not want to log in with my admin account on a public computer or my iPhone). Thanks, and I'll be in touch... - MBK 004 on the iPhone 02:01, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
←It has positively been determined that I suffered a hard drive failure. Since my laptop is still under warranty, I am getting a new one free of charge, but I am still out of pocket for the data recovery. The timeline for this is about two weeks for me to send off my computer for data recovery and then time for the new hard drive to be installed as well as the re-installation of the OS. Then I will have a few weeks of getting everything back to normal, since I've had this computer for three years I have customized so many settings it is almost like I just got a new computer and will have to do it all over again. I really did not want a involuntary two week vacation after I took a voluntary six week one... - MBK 004 on the iPhone 16:04, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
←Time for an update. Just heard back from DriveSavers, they think they have successfully recovered everything from the drive. Of course, that is for me to discern or not once I receive the data back, but I am optimistic. I should receive my computer back early next week, and then it will take me a few days to complete the replacement of the drive as well as the reinstall of the OS and re-integration of my data. Look for my return in about seven days from now if everything happens according to schedule (I should not be away for longer than a week and a half at the most) - MBK 004 on the iPhone 21:08, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
I will be here on an on again off again basis for the next ten or so days; I'm trying to get back into summer school but in this case that requires a few placement exams, and those are long and difficult (and boring, honestly) and unfortunately necessary. In addition, I'm trying to dig up info on Able Archer 83 and that has been time consuming as well. Just so you all know. TomStar81 ( Talk) 03:58, 27 May 2009 (UTC)
The North Korean nuclear weapons test just got more disturbing: news reports are claiming that the North Korean leader has renounced the 1953 cease fire, and with this move I fear that we end up with some level of combat before the whole thing sorts itself out. I post this here because the renounces cease fire will undoubtedly prompt people to look into the North and South Korean military articles, and as we all know from our main page experiences higher traffic almost always equals higher vandalism. Therefore, I would ask that those who have the time and the inclination please keep tabs on the North Korean and South Korean armed forces articles, as well as the Korean War articles, so we can monitor the information there and move to protect the pages if things seem to be getting out of hand. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:31, 28 May 2009 (UTC)
Commenting on the war, not the articles: oh boy. Things could get rather interesting rather quickly... — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 02:44, 29 May 2009 (UTC)
A concerned editor has just bought to my attention an editing dispute occuring at Second Sino-Japanese War, which has led to User:Nihonjoe protecting the page for seven days begining on 27 May. It appears to have come about by the removal of the Communist Chinese forces from the infobox. As I have little knowledge in the area, I felt it best to announce here. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 08:21, 30 May 2009 (UTC)
Hi all. I just wanted to note that I am getting extremely stressed and annoyed with Wikipedia at the moment, so I feel a wikibreak is likely to be imminent. I don't think I have ever felt this shitty in regards to Wikipedia, nor this distressed since I was suffering from severe anxiety and depression a few years ago. I will probably be cutting down my editing over the next few days, but may still be on a bit to monitor my current FAC. Just thought I should let you all know. Sorry guys. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. ( talk) 06:32, 2 June 2009 (UTC)
I'm sorry to announce you that it seems I'll be in tone with the current inactivity period (which is BTW, the project's worst since I'm around) and it is likely that I will not be contributing until tuesday. However, I have closed today few ACRs and created the monthly newsletter so I hope that my absence would not be even noticed. All the best, -- Eurocopter ( talk) 10:54, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
To go along with the two break announcements above, I will be going sailing from tomorrow to sometime around Monday the 15th. After that, I'll return for a few days before going away for another week, after which I'll return for a few days and go away for two weeks. Sorry for all this time away. I'll try to check in periodically for some of the time, if I can steal someone's wifi. – Joe N 14:56, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
Guys, not available to sort this myself due RL commitments but the May contest results in the latest Bugle are in fact April's - doesn't look like anyone's added up the May contest entries following Bryce and I allocating the points a few days ago - any volunteers to fix? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:09, 3 June 2009 (UTC)
I was researching the matter of article maintaining such as would be the case through the {{ maintained}} template, and happened to find User:Richard001/Maintenance. Half way down the page Richard proposed an interesting idea for article maintenance:
It is very important that such maintainers be identifiable, otherwise nobody knows whether a page is even being maintained. I think the best place for this is the talk page. At the moment we have the imperfect {{ maintained}}, which boxes the maintainer into a specific role that they may not want (and hence they'll avoid using the template). Multiple versions are needed so that the template can accurately describe the role of the maintainer(s). The message could also be conveyed via WikiProject banners, e.g. |maintainer = [User name] to produce 'This article is maintained by User:XYZ' or 'This article is being maintained [show details]'.
Maintainers may not want to 'advertise' so boldly, though I can't think of any simple way to avoid this. Other arrangements can be imagined, and as long as there is a way for people to tell whether an article is maintained (and if so by who) they can achieve the same purpose as a talk page notice, though people who are not 'in the know' may find this information more difficult to find.
The part about adding such coding to a project banner strikes me as something worth proposing, if we could do for this maintained idea what we did for the portal idea then we could subtly advertise that an article is being maintained and to what capacity it is being maintained without using the big maintained template, for example:
|maintained1-name=username/working group
|maintained1-area=citations/copyediting/factuality
Thoughts? TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:08, 5 June 2009 (UTC)
If two or more working groups are operating together toward a greater goal could we create a template to facilitate easier movement between them? In time I am hoping to create the single largest FT covering the entirety of US Navy battleships, but at the moment my similarly run Iowa and South Dakota class battleship working groups are not linked on any common template, and I wanted to ask about matter like this before moving to address the issue. TomStar81 ( Talk) 22:54, 6 June 2009 (UTC)
Hartfelt ( talk · contribs) has an A-class nomination up, his first ever, that has drawn very few comments. I've helped him with the article prior to the nomination, and he left me a message regarding the few comments, wondering what would happen if the article "fails to draw much comment". I feel kind of bad... :-/ Could someone else (I've already supported) take a swipe at reviewing? The links are Army of the Tennessee and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Army of the Tennessee. Thanks, — Ed (Talk • Contribs) 00:37, 13 June 2009 (UTC)
Would it be a good idea to add a link to the academy to the welcome to our project template? From where I sit, as the academy was intended to aid those in the project, and those new to it need the most aid, it would be a good way of providing assistance to the new users within the project. TomStar81 ( Talk) 07:23, 13 June 2009 (UTC)