Two years was long enough, I think, between archives.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 22:28, 31 March 2013 (UTC)
Aye there, 'Sturmvogel 66', I'm a member of WikiProject Ships. To help naval historians here at Wikipedia in the effort of writing and citing naval history articles sometime ago I created the List of ships captured in the 19th century and Bibliography of early American naval history pages. Over the last year(+) I have been tracking down and including names of captured ships and naval history texts for inclusion in either of these articles. I like to think that I have included most captured ships (19th century) and most naval history texts (covering the 1700s-1800s) for inclusion in these articles, so if you know of any captured ships or naval history texts that are not included would you kindly include them, either on the page or the talk page of the appropriate article? Any help would be a big help and feedback is always welcomed. Thanx! -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 17:38, 1 April 2013 (UTC)
On 6 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Ibuki-class armored cruiser, which you created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ibuki-class armored cruiser. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Allen3 talk 08:51, 6 April 2013 (UTC)
On 7 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Minotaur-class cruiser (1906), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Minotaur-class cruisers of 1906 have been described by naval historian R. A. Burt as "cruiser editions of the Lord Nelson-class battleship"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Minotaur-class cruiser (1906). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Casliber ( talk · contribs) 08:55, 7 April 2013 (UTC)
On 8 April 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Resistance (1861), which you created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Resistance (1861). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Materialscientist ( talk) 14:05, 8 April 2013 (UTC)
My edit was based on what looked to me like a consensus at this discussion. Srnec ( talk) 11:22, 11 April 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate, just a note that I haven't forgotten this, and expect to get hold of the Tassie ferry book this week... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 05:20, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Keep it coming! Pendright ( talk) 16:55, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
Your comment: Not "the" range, "a" range and "a" complement, not "the" complement. What's up with these?’
Pendright ( talk) 19:38, 14 April 2013 (UTC)
I think I've finished up the last of your outstanding comments on 824th Tank Destroyer Battalion - anything else you'd like me to have a look at? (I've tracked down a copy of the Gimlette book, which is an interesting travelogue but sadly light on the sort of detail that transfers across easily) Andrew Gray ( talk) 15:38, 21 April 2013 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for his fine efforts in the March 2013 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 118 points from 15 articles. Well done! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 15:15, 23 April 2013 (UTC) |
The Content Review Medal of Merit | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2013, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert ( talk) 22:52, 27 April 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Sturmvogel 66. Yep, I found it highly unlikely. Not just unlikely that someone would loot the gun, take it to Hong Kong, drop it in the harbour for someone to later recover it and move it into a museum, but, most importantly, that this could all happen without any on-line news coverage at all (granted, news from the 1980s are a bit hard to find on-line, but still, there should be some reference somewhere). It would be one extremely interesting detail, if it could be backed up by a reference, but as it was it looked very dubious. If it could be properly verified, and given some more detail, the how, when and why, it would have made a good hook fact for DYK. Manxruler ( talk) 15:56, 28 April 2013 (UTC)
I believe, for the most part, I’ve taken care of the items you mentioned in your Mahan comments of 14 April. BTW, I did get a used copy of Blood On The Sea. Of the four pages devoted to Mahan, only two were relevant and they offered nothing new. Nonetheless, the publication is a good addition to my small, but growing library on Destroyers. Thanks for the hint. Pendright ( talk) 22:07, 29 April 2013 (UTC)
Are you happy with this article now? There hasn't been any comments for a couple of weeks. Hawkeye7 ( talk) 08:05, 30 April 2013 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Thank you for the fantastic GA review of Arihant-class submarine........I'm proud to announce that it became the first Indian Warfare GA ever!!!..Thanks a lot! TheStrike Σagle 15:44, 3 May 2013 (UTC) |
On 4 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Nairana (1917), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after surviving service as a aircraft/ seaplane carrier in World War I, the Nairana was twice almost capsized by rogue waves during her career as a Bass Strait ferry? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Nairana (1917). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:03, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
Hallo, I've got as far as I can with the GA review of Potemkin. The article needs to do three things in my view to pass the GA: the main one is to cover the legacy of Potemkin - the legend or myth; the inspiration to revolution; and the subsequent Eisenstein film (which oddly is in the lead and the See also but isn't discussed, and it needs to be - how far is it true, what was E. building on, etc. I suggest that would be best in a "Legacy" or similar section.
That indicates also that the See also list needs attention, possibly removal with incorporation of any wanted links in the text - for instance, if the other mutinies inspired or were inspired by Potemkin, then that needs saying, with citations.
And the current "Mutiny" section ends abruptly - well, did the ship sink or didn't it? Clearly it was fit to be towed home three weeks later. The gap needs filling.
All the best, your GA reviewer --- Chiswick Chap ( talk) 09:30, 4 May 2013 (UTC)
On 6 May 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Hector-class ironclad, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that completion of the Hector-class ironclad HMS Valiant was delayed for nearly five years by a shortage of rifled muzzle-loading guns? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Hector-class ironclad. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 08:23, 6 May 2013 (UTC)
We are a week into Round 3, but it is off to a flying start, with Sven Manguard ( submissions) claiming for the high-importance Portal:Sports and Portal:Geography (which are the first portals ever awarded bonus points in the WikiCup) and Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) claiming for a did you know of sea, the highest scoring individual did you know article ever submitted for the WikiCup. Round 2 saw very impressive scores at close; first place Casliber ( submissions) and second place Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) both scored over 1000 points; a feat not seen in Round 2 since 2010. This, in part, has been made possible by the change in the bonus points rules, but is also testament to the quality of the competition this year. Pool C and Pool G were most competitive, with three quarters of participants making it to Round 3, while Pool D was the least, with only the top two scorers making it through. The lowest qualifying score was 123, significantly higher than last year's 65, 2011's 41 or even 2010's 100.
The next issue of The Signpost is due to include a brief update on the current WikiCup, comparing it to previous years' competitions. This may be of interest to current WikiCup followers, and may help bring some more new faces into the community. We would also like to note that this round includes an extra competitor to the 32 advertised, who has been added to a random pool. This extra inclusion seems to have been the fairest way to deal with a small mistake made before the beginning of this round, but should not affect the competition in a large way. If you have any questions or concerns about this, please feel free to contact one of the judges.
A rules clarification: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on 29/30 April, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—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. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 15:52, 7 May 2013 (UTC)
First off, I wish to state that I feel collaborative nominations within the Good Article project are an incredibly salutary methodology, one that implements both assured quality and efficacy into the process. This is why, especially regarding articles of immense importance, such as the subject article, I contact prior, prolific editors to the article in order to ascertain whether or not they might wish to participate in a collaborative nomination. This is why I contact you, along with a few others, in order to recruit for a nomination of the above article I am planning. I myself am a minimal contributor to the article, but have always been fascinated with the topic. Would any of you wish to collaborate on this planned nomination? Thanks! QatarStarsLeague ( talk) 01:56, 8 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel,
I'm aware the change I made to the MiG-3 page is contradictory to the initial position of the article. However, no references were provided to back up the claim that the MiG-3 was less manoeuvrable than the Bf 109, while the test pilot interviewed by 1C Studios (which is a trustworthy source) has first hand experience and claims the opposite. [ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_wTZjYGyl-4 ] He also mentions the reason for this at the end of the video (smoother stick than the Bf 109). Keep in mind that wing load isn't everything, the FW-190 for example often outturned planes with a lower wing load.
I hope we can find more sources to back up either finding. Tervan ( talk) 22:54, 9 May 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I'm reviewing Talk:USS Leary (DD-158)/GA1 right now, and the article employs Andrew Hague Convoy Database as a source. I saw that there are at least four Royal Navy ship GAs you wrote using the same, so I'm assuming the source is a WP:RS, but could you please let me know, for future reference, what makes such a website a reliable source (I'm still fairly new to the GAN reviews, so I'm sorry if this should be obvious to me). Cheers!-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 09:54, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
I see you were interested in trimming out Battle of Kursk article. Gunbirddriver is also interested in seeing what can be done about the size of the article. I think your suggest for trimming the article is very practicable, and I expanded on it (See the talkpage), but I think it can still use more ideas. What are your thoughts? EyeTruth ( talk) 01:41, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
You've nominated Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi for June 4 (71st anniversary of loss) but I notice that it's the 100th anniversary of the launch of SMS Markgraf the same day. So it looks as though it's a warship for TFA that day (!), but which is the better choice? Bencherlite Talk 10:16, 20 May 2013 (UTC)
Good to go, I think. - Dank ( push to talk) 02:32, 22 May 2013 (UTC)
World Digital Library Wikipedia Partnership - We need you! | |
---|---|
Hi Sturmvogel 66! I'm the Wikipedian In Residence at the World Digital Library, a project of the Library of Congress and UNESCO. I'm recruiting Wikipedians who are passionate about history & culture to participate in improving Wikipedia using the WDL's vast free online resources. Participants can earn our awesome WDL barnstar and help to disseminate free knowledge from over 100 libraries in 7 different languages. Please sign up to participate here. Thanks for editing Wikipedia and I look forward to working with you! SarahStierch ( talk) 20:28, 22 May 2013 (UTC) |
The Nuclear Barnstar | ||
For your reviews of the 509th Composite Group and Pumpkin bomb Hawkeye7 ( talk) 01:28, 28 May 2013 (UTC) |
Most unexpected, but thank you. Happy to help out.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:42, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
Much obliged for your Mahan comments, but somehow they have been wiped clean from my talk page. Pendright ( talk) 02:52, 28 May 2013 (UTC)
I do not expect that people will work through the entire list in the order laid out, as you pointed out people will work on whatever tickles their interest regardless of whether or not its a current project in someone else's portfolio or not. As phases change, or as work narrows in one particular area, I would expect (in fact I've been anticipating this) that editors will either arrive to work on the new material or drift away do the absence of old material. I also suspect that other projects (like WikiProject Biography) will take an increased notice of OMT when major work shifts to the phase most associated with their stated goals. One thing you and Ed both missed here too is that the material in the Phase II-V lists for OMT is still somewhat incomplete in that there are more detailed areas to include (weapons depots, shipyards, etc) and hashing that out will be part of the task we will face as people come in to work on newer material.
As for battlecruisers of the world, I am glad to have been informed of this since I was unaware of this development. I'll see about adding this to the op-ed at some point tomorrow or the next day, but right now its 4:30AM here and I'm exhausted, so this ship is heading to port for the night :) TomStar81 ( Talk) 10:22, 30 May 2013 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel, I'look at Conte di Cavour-class battleship and see if there's something important missed from Bargoni's book. If there's something that I can't directly add I'll report it to you or in Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Conte di Cavour-class battleship/archive1? Demostene119 ( talk) 07:44, 31 May 2013 (UTC)
I was never able to retrieve your last set of comments. Although I did get a brief glance at them before they vanished. I did modifiy the article based on what I could remember, which was not much. I changed some wording in the lead; got rid of the section you said belonged in the class article (but used a bit of it at the end of General characteristics); tinkered some with complement; changed the text on the extent to which Mahan was refitted, and that’s about it. For my part, I’d like to continue. But if that’s not possible, let me thank you for your ton of help and invaluable insights. Pendright ( talk) 00:18, 9 June 2013 (UTC)
Hello! Now, some of you might have already received a similar message a little while ago regarding the Recruitment Centre, so if you have, there is no need to read the rest of this. This message is directed to users who have reviewed over 15 Good article nominations and are not part of
WikiProject Good articles (the first message I sent out went to only WikiProject members).
So for those who haven't heard about the Recruitment Centre yet, you may be wondering why there is a Good article icon with a bunch of stars around it (to the right). The answer? WikiProject Good articles will be launching a Recruitment Centre very soon! The centre will allow all users to be taught how to review Good article nominations by experts just like you! However, in order for the Recruitment Centre to open in the first place, we need some volunteers:
If you have any questions please do not hesitate to contact me. I look forward to seeing this program bring new reviewers to the Good article community and all the positive things it will bring along. A message will be sent out to all recruiters regarding the date when the Recruitment Centre will open when it is determined. The message will also contain some further details to clarify things that may be a bit confusing.-- Dom497 ( talk) This message was sent out by -- EdwardsBot ( talk) 14:50, 9 June 2013 (UTC) |
Hi! Since I'm aware of the Project Majestic Titan and your contributions in the field, I thought to drop you this as a heads-up: I'm currently developing the Battle of Šibenik article which is in itself unrelated to any battleship, but I stumbled upon information that AA guns originally installed on the Italian battleship Vittorio Veneto were reused by Yugoslav People's Army (or possibly navy: the source is ambiguous in that respect since the coastal artillery was normally operated by the navy but the source specifically cites its commander by name and rank identifying him as a part of the army) as a part of the Žirje Island coastal artillery battery. I added a short passage on that in the battleship's article for future reference. In addition, there's this newspaper article (containing a photo of one of the guns) on refurbishment of two of the guns (all 12 were removed after 1995 from the island) which are expected to be returned to the now disused battery site as a part of a museum. Contents of information panels designed for the museum may be found here.
I did not research how Yugoslavia came in possession of the guns though. I only assume those might have been a part of Italian war reparations, but I have no solid information on that. Cheers!-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 09:08, 10 June 2013 (UTC)
On 11 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Nagato-class battleship, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Nagato-class battleships were the first dreadnoughts to be launched with guns larger than 15 inches (381 mm) even though they were not the first to be laid down? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Nagato-class battleship. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 16:03, 11 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi! I need an advice re defining battle location in the Action of 1 November 1944 article. Freivogel source used in the article specifies a set coordinates indicating that those are reported by British sources (page 65). This is all nice but the same source provides a map of where the wrecks are found (located in 1999 and 2000) (page 51), and while the coordinates are not specified in the map, it is possible to determine that those are not in line with those reported on p.65. The two sites are only 10 km apart, but I'm wondering which set of coordinates should the article report in the coord template - those specified by the Freivogel prose or a point in between the three wrecks? Cheers.-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 22:12, 13 June 2013 (UTC)
...redirects to Imperial Japanese Navy Technical Department, for which it seems to be a nickname. Something like our DAPRA, maybe? Might be worth a link. Good luck with the FA candidacy. -- Coemgenus ( talk) 15:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
°C this is from the book: Gröner, Erich; Jung, Dieter (1990). German Warships: 1815–1945 [Die deutschen Kriegsschiffe, 1815–1945] 2. Annapolis: Naval Institute Press. p. 72. ISBN 978-0-87021-790-6. In the Russian-language sources, too Celsius. The Germans have never measured in Fahrenheit.-- Inctructor ( talk) 18:09, 14 June 2013 (UTC)
Aye there Sturmvogel 66, Perhaps I was too hasty upgrading the rating on the USS Monitor. If it is not fully referenced or fully complete could you give me a brief summary as to what exactly is missing? It seemed pretty well covered. What is the most important topic that is missing? Perhaps I can write it up and provide citations. Thanks for looking out. (Add: Wow! I just got a load of all the awards you've received. Just wanted to say thanks for your GREAT efforts.) -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 19:27, 16 June 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the Operation Whirlwind! Tomobe03 ( talk) 09:59, 17 June 2013 (UTC) |
Sturmvogel, thanks for uploading and including that great photo of Monitor's gun and turret mechanics. Looking at the replicas, they must have been beautiful to behold in their day. I'm not clear on something. Are the gun and gun-mount in the picture also replicas? The gun looks restored and real. If not did you manage to get any photos of the actual gun, etc? I think the article would do well if it had a small gallery (4-6) of such photos, perhaps in a gallery section, at or near the bottom of the page. If you have the photos I can manage the gallery mark up. -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 06:35, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Hi, I see that you are interested in the history of the Cold War and I wonder if you could help me copy edit an article from the very start of it, Operation Claw. I have written the original article in Norwegian Bokmål/Riksmål and I translated it into English, but as I am not a native speaker I am sure there are parts that need to be corrected. I try to have it look ok before I upload it, so I did the translation on a sub-page of my user pages on Norwegian Bokmål/Riksmål. Best regards, Ulflarsen ( talk) 08:04, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
Your input is needed here. -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 22:50, 23 June 2013 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the Military History Wikiproject's coordinators, I am very pleased to present to you this A-class medal with swords in recognition of your fine work developing the USS Saratoga (CV-3), Conte di Cavour-class battleship, and HMS Warrior (1860) articles to A-class status. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 10:34, 24 June 2013 (UTC) |
Hi. I noticed your comment here about sometimes changing the variant of English if it doesn't seem too big of a deal. I have probably done the same myself in the past. We are not really supposed to do this; can I suggest in future if you are doing this and it seems uncontroversial (perhaps because of strong national ties to a topic?) that you make a note in article talk of what you are doing and why? This makes it easier for others to see when and why it was changed in the future. Thanks a lot, -- John ( talk) 10:49, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
On 30 June 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article French destroyer Espingole, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that it took seven years after the French destroyer Espingole ran aground for her captain to be court-martialled and acquitted? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/French destroyer Espingole. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 10:08, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
Just to let you know, I've got the review page watched, so I'll be able to help out with reviewers' comments and such. Parsecboy ( talk) 22:10, 30 June 2013 (UTC)
We are down to our final 16: the 2013 semi-finals are upon us. A score of 321 was required to survive round 3, further cementing this as the most competitive WikiCup yet; round 3 was survived in 2012 with 243 points, in 2011 with 76 points and in 2010 with 250 points. The change may in part be to do with the fact that more articles are now awarded bonus points, in addition to more competitive play. Reaching the final has, in the past, required 573 points (2012, a 135% increase on the score needed to reach round 4), 150 points (2011, a 97% increase) and 417 points (2010, a 72% increase). This round has seen over a third of participants claiming points for featured articles (with seven users claiming for multiple featured articles) and most users have also gained bonus points. However, the majority of points continue to come from good articles, followed by did you know articles. In this round, every content type was utilised by at least one user, proving that the WikiCup brings together content contributors from all corners of the project.
Round 3 saw a number of contributions of note. Figureskatingfan ( submissions) claimed the first featured topic points in this year's competition for her excellent work on topics related to Maya Angelou, the noted American author and poet. We have also continued to see high-importance articles improved as part of the competition: Ealdgyth ( submissions) was awarded a thoroughly well-earned 560 points for her featured article Middle Ages and 102 points for her good article Battle of Hastings. Good articles James Chadwick and Stanislaw Ulam netted Hawkeye7 ( submissions) 102 and 72 points respectively, while 72 points were awarded to Piotrus ( submissions) for each of Władysław Sikorski and Emilia Plater, both recently promoted to good article status. Collaborative efforts between WikiCup participants have continued, with, for example, Casliber ( submissions) and Sasata ( submissions) being awarded 180 points each for their featured article on Boletus luridus.
A rules reminder: content promoted between rounds can be claimed in the round after the break, but not the round before. The case in point is content promoted on the 29/30 June, which may be claimed in this round. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. We are currently seeing concern about the amount of time people have to wait for reviews, especially at GAC- if you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 09:59, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
This message is being sent to let you know of a discussion at the Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard regarding a content dispute discussion you may have participated in. Content disputes can hold up article development and make editing difficult for editors. You are not required to participate, but you are both invited and encouraged to help find a resolution. The thread is " Talk:Battle of Kursk#Use of term Blitzkrieg". Please join us to help form a consensus. Thank you! EarwigBot operator / talk 20:39, 1 July 2013 (UTC)
You were named as a party to Wikipedia:Dispute resolution noticeboard#Talk:Battle of Kursk#Use of term Blitzkrieg. While you don't have to participate, it would be nice for you to stop in and give any thoughts you may have about this dispute, including what I believe the best method for forward progress is. Hasteur ( talk) 20:11, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your contributions to the WikiProject's June 2013 backlog reduction drive, I hereby award you this Military history WikiProject award. Anotherclown ( talk) 13:07, 3 July 2013 (UTC) |
Hi Sturmvogel,
Thank you for expressing an interest in the She Has a Name articles. Because you commented on the featured topic candidacy for these articles, I thought that you should be notified of their proposed merger. Any comments you are willing to provide there, whether in support or opposition, would be greatly appreciated.
Neelix ( talk) 13:55, 6 July 2013 (UTC)
Talk:French destroyer Espingole/GA1. I really shouldn't be reviewing for the competition here but... Ealdgyth - Talk 01:32, 13 July 2013 (UTC)
Courageous, Glorious, Furious
Thank you for covering historic
battleships with class, - you are an
awesome Wikipedian!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:01, 17 July 2012 (UTC)
A year ago, you were the 185th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:08, 17 July 2013 (UTC)
Hi there, you're getting this message as you are involved in a case at the Dispute Resolution Noticeboard which is currently open. Today DRN has undergone a big move resulting in individual cases on subpages as opposed to all the content on one page. This is to inform you that your case is now back on the DRN board and you will be able to 'watch' the subpage it's located on. Thanks, Cabe 6403 ( Talk• Sign) 13:12, 18 July 2013 (UTC)
OK, I stand corrected, the Texas wasn't a pre-dreadnought. But she wasn't "the first American battleship" either, since she was preceded by ironclad and wooden battleships. So what was she? First steel battleship? -- Isaac Rabinovitch ( talk) 03:26, 29 July 2013 (UTC)
The Editor's Barnstar | |
You created a LOT of German World War II destroyer articles. Howicus ( talk) 03:47, 29 July 2013 (UTC) |
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's Sasata ( submissions) currently leads overall, while Pool B's Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today, Miyagawa ( submissions), with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by Ealdgyth ( submissions), and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by Piotrus ( submissions), Hawkeye7 ( submissions) and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.
Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 23:25, 31 July 2013 (UTC)
The Content Review Medal of Merit | ||
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article Candidate reviews for the period Apr-Jun 2013, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert ( talk) 10:18, 1 August 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, I've been working my way through Laser Brain's comments at FAC and I think I am close to finishing. As I don't have easy access to the source, can you suggest a slight expansion to "Indecision by the Admiralty caused many delays and nearly drove her builders bankrupt before a grant of £50,000 was awarded to keep them solvent.<ref>{{harvnb|Lambert|2010|pages=34, 37}}</ref>"? LB was asking what sort of indecision. Was it design changes? Changes to the specifications? Both? Thanks in advance. -- John ( talk) 19:29, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
*Here's another one: "Warrior began a refit in November 1864 during which the Armstrong guns, which had not proved successful in use, were removed and her armament was upgraded to the latest rifled muzzle-loading guns." Was it a one-for-one replacement? I seem to recall it may not have been. If this is in your source I think it is worth mentioning. --
John (
talk) 20:11, 3 August 2013 (UTC)
Warrior also lacked handiness in manoeuvre because of her extreme length, and this was considered a disadvantage as the old galley tactic of ramming had come back into fashion now that warships had regained the power of free movement denied them in their sailing years. Indeed, the Warrior had a strengthened stem for this purpose.
Peter Padfield, Battleship, p24
The one vital point in which [Gloire's] design was more effective was the complete protection for rudder and screw; the British ship with counter stern and no armour at all was dangerously exposed.
Peter Padfield, Battleship, p24
-- John ( talk) 12:09, 6 August 2013 (UTC)
G'day, Sturm, not sure if you've seen my comments at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū, but if you could respond, I'd be more than happy to support the article's promotion. Regards, AustralianRupert ( talk) 22:53, 2 August 2013 (UTC)
Sturmvogel, I cannot find the DRN report discussion being referred to, even though I did make a number of comments there earlier. All I can get to is some sort of brief outline. Is there a link to get to whatever it is happened after I left? Sorry to bother you with this one. Gunbirddriver ( talk) 00:31, 4 August 2013 (UTC)
Hey Sturm - I went about as far as I could with the Feron Warship article and what I could scrounge from Google Books. I'm guessing since you added them, you might be able to add some details from the Gaulois article and Gille's book. If you have the time and inclination, see what you can do. Parsecboy ( talk) 15:31, 9 August 2013 (UTC)
I have time if you are ready to complete it. Dapi89 ( talk) 20:35, 11 August 2013 (UTC)
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.-- TonyTheTiger ( T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:33, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
Hi mate, moved your draft into the upcoming issue here, and borrowed your 2010 Wikicup award as an image. If you'd like to pick a different image, or want to edit the text (I only italicised your section names and fixed a typo) then pls feel free, but I would like to try and despatch it before midnight GMT (tomorrow morning Sydney time). Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:51, 20 August 2013 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
Very impressed with your fine work on ships. Keep up the great work and congrats on the FA! ♦ Dr. Blofeld 09:58, 21 August 2013 (UTC) |
Hi, Sturmvogel. Wats up. Your vote is needed in the Kursk talkpage. So this time around Nick-D has suggested that a poll on the suggested wordings would be the best way to avoid the whole drama and reach a conclusion. All you need to do this time around is to place your vote for whichever version you think is preferable. The LINK. CHeers. EyeTruth ( talk) 17:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus ( submissions), Figureskatingfan ( submissions), ThaddeusB ( submissions), Dana boomer ( submissions), Status ( submissions), Ed! ( submissions), 12george1 ( submissions), Calvin999 ( submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.
This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.
Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 05:33, 29 August 2013 (UTC)
Nice work on Tosa-class battleship! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:57, 29 August 2013 (UTC) |
Aaah, I see you are busy with GAs - well done. A couple of days ago you reviewed Daniel Scott (harbour-master) and raised points about the tunnel below the prison. I have tweaked the article and recorded this at the DYK page. Would you take to re-look at it when time permits. Cheers Victuallers ( talk) 10:18, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
The Original Barnstar | |
For your work on HMS Warrior (1860). I really enjoyed working on it with you, and I look forward to working on more with you in the future. John ( talk) 23:07, 30 August 2013 (UTC) |
Are you familiar with these editors: User:Ranger Steve, User:EyeSerene, User:EnigmaMcmxc? I thought I was pretty reasonable in the recent debate that lasted some three months, but I must tell you that whenever I read your responses I was always impressed with your ability to make a sound point, your willingness to concede on matters that were not essential, and your readiness to make allowances for others. Then I happened to be doing a little research and read through this. It turns out there are a quite a number of seasoned editors with a broad base of knowledge, great balance and tremendous patience. I’m a bit of a potato farmer in comparison, but I have been happy to have a chance to work with you. Tip of the hat! Gunbirddriver ( talk) 01:22, 31 August 2013 (UTC)
The WikiProject Report would like to focus on WikiProject Good Articles for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions, so be sure to sign your answers. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Hope you have a great day! - buff bills 7701 13:53, 1 September 2013 (UTC)
On 2 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article List of aircraft maintenance carriers of the Royal Navy, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the British aircraft maintenance carrier HMS Unicorn (pictured) was the only aircraft carrier ever to conduct a shore bombardment during wartime when she shelled North Korean positions during the Korean War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/List of aircraft maintenance carriers of the Royal Navy. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 2 September 2013 (UTC)
On 7 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Defence-class ironclad, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the British Defence-class ironclad (pictured) was considered by the naval architect Sir Nathaniel Barnaby to have only one quarter the combat value of the preceding Warrior class? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Defence-class ironclad. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 16:02, 7 September 2013 (UTC)
I am in the process of revising the articles on US battleships commissioned 1912-23. One of my primary goals is to put information on armament and propulsion refits in the table where it is called to the user's attention. I don't want users to think that these ships started WW2 in their as-built configuration. I do agree that this information also needs to be in the body of the article; however, I think that this "buries" the information.
I apologize if I have disturbed your talk archives by my reply method; this is my first reply to another user. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RobDuch ( talk • contribs) 21:35, 15 September 2013 (UTC)
Interesting. I've been avidly data-mining military reference books, especially naval, since I was 10 (and I'm now over 50) and my usual approach is to simply look something up in the table. However, I've only been editing Wikipedia a few weeks. I saw that the infobox on the Penn-class page was hidden, and I found that a hindrance to my usual approach. I personally am quite good at finding what I want in the middle of large amounts of data, but I recognize that others might not be, so I'll try to keep infoboxes reasonable in the future. I went to the OMT page and pulled up the user list but couldn't figure out how to add my name to it (I'm such a noob). I started with the Wyoming-class through Nevada-class because their articles were of respectable length, though uneven quality. I am hoping to make the Tennessee- and New Mexico-class articles more informative than they currently are. Anyway, I'll concentrate on other pages than the Pennsylvania-class for now. RobDuch ( talk) 11:30, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill [talk] 18:09, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi! Thanks for assessment of the Croatian special police order of battle in 1991–95 article. I have added the missing cites now (originally the cite found at the table head was meant to cover the contents). Could you please have another quick look?-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 15:51, 17 September 2013 (UTC)
Some time ago you told me BTW, there's absolutely nothing stopping you from fixing these trivial issues yourself. I accept this as a sarcasm and idea to "go away". For sure: then and now I am able to do this. But I prefer translate your really good articles (no sarcasm - something about half of my GA articles on pl.wiki are yours). And sometime I want to educate peple, because then I will have less work. Your`s Kawachi-class battleship (if there is something like "your article on wiki) don`t pass "ferret test". Not all converts with inches have |0. For example "The shell of the 4.7-inch (120 mm)" - its 199 if you will convert by hand. And in my personal opinion all such sentence as "The design was then revised with the turrets in the hexagonal layout using the same 45-caliber 12-inch guns " should be also converted.
Last but not least - thank you very much for Wikipedia:Featured topic candidates/Aircraft maintenance carriers of the Royal Navy/archive1. That`s my next target to translate to pl.wiki. PMG ( talk) 16:47, 18 September 2013 (UTC)
On 19 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Japanese battleship Settsu, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Japanese battleship Settsu (pictured) simulated the radio traffic of all six aircraft carriers of the 1st Air Fleet at the beginning of the Pacific War in an effort to deceive the Allies as to their location? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese battleship Settsu. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 19 September 2013 (UTC)
That'll be great - I'll stick it on my watchlist so if any queries come up regarding the sources I used then I'll be able to answer them. Miyagawa ( talk) 07:57, 20 September 2013 (UTC)
On 21 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Japanese battleship Kawachi, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Japanese battleship Kawachi capsized and sank only four minutes after an internal magazine explosion on 12 July 1918 while at anchor? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese battleship Kawachi. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:03, 21 September 2013 (UTC)
On 22 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Japanese ironclad Kongō, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Japanese ironclad Kongō was one of the two ships that returned the survivors of the wrecked Ottoman frigate Ertuğrul to Turkey in 1891? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese ironclad Kongō. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
I had just approved your DYK nomination for this article when I realised that the image in the hook was not the same as the one in the article. Would you like to put this right informally by either adding the image to the article or by changing the image attached to the hook to the one actually used in the article? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 06:25, 22 September 2013 (UTC)
On 23 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kawachi-class battleship, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the only significant action performed by either of the Japanese Kawachi-class battleships during World War I was when they bombarded German fortifications in China in 1914? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kawachi-class battleship. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 20:03, 23 September 2013 (UTC)
On 24 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kongō-class ironclad, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the two Kongō-class ironclads built in Britain had to be sailed to Japan in 1878 by hired crews, as the Imperial Japanese Navy lacked the necessary experience? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Kongō-class ironclad. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 04:18, 24 September 2013 (UTC)
Hello
Do you have idea why in this edit there is INDEX below last template? This page is in main space so its (probably) automaticly indexed. I am asking because here there is quite a lot of warships. PMG ( talk) 12:52, 25 September 2013 (UTC)
On 26 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Grasshopper (T85), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after HMS Grasshopper was sunk following the Battle of Singapore, two of the crew managed to sail 2,680 miles (4,310 km) to India using a map torn out of a child's atlas? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Grasshopper (T85). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 23:27, 26 September 2013 (UTC)
On 27 September 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Warrior-class cruiser, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the World War I-era Warrior-class cruiser had "the reputation of being the best cruisers we ever built" by the Royal Navy, according to naval historian Oscar Parkes? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Warrior-class cruiser. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
— Crisco 1492 ( talk) 07:43, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
I appreciate the reviews of the two gold pieces. Thanks again. I will make a point of returning the favor and reviewing one or two of yours!-- Wehwalt ( talk) 16:25, 27 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, your contributions to our project have been exemplary. I was wondering if you might wish to run for an RfA. If you do, it would be a privilege to nominate you. Thanks. Wifione Message 18:28, 28 September 2013 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am very pleased to present you with this A-Class medal with swords to acknowledge your success in developing Russian battleship Potemkin, List of sunken battlecruisers, and Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū to A-Class status. Keep up the great work! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:50, 30 September 2013 (UTC) |
On 1 October 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Duke of Edinburgh-class cruiser, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the two British Duke of Edinburgh-class cruisers captured three German merchantmen while on convoy escort duties in the Red Sea shortly after the start of World War I in 1914? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Duke of Edinburgh-class cruiser. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 00:02, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata ( submissions), Hawkeye7 ( submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber ( submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).
The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 22:55, 1 October 2013 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, I saw you reverted my edits to USS Lexington (CV-2). I made these edits because while I saw links in the article to Wake Island I saw none to the Battle of Wake Island, and I thought these links would be helpful. Am I missing something? Thanks. Spinner145 ( talk) 15:55, 3 October 2013 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, I finally got around to responding to your GAN review. Figured I ought to let you know. Thanks again for waiting on me. Parsecboy ( talk) 12:50, 4 October 2013 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am very pleased to present you with this A-Class medal with swords to acknowledge your success in developing Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano, Japanese battleship Mutsu, and Japanese aircraft carrier Ryūjō to A-Class status. Well done, and keep on cracking on! Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 08:47, 7 October 2013 (UTC) |
Can you please give a quick check to the newly added image to this DYK, and if it's okay (and everything else is; I did make the change you requested to the article's lede), give it the appropriate approval icon? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 22:06, 9 October 2013 (UTC)
I recently placed a request for a Class B-assessment of the Mahan-class destroyer article I’ve been working on. I saw your AJ Savage article there, and I decided to read it. After skimming though the first paragraph of the Design and development section, I observed the word that was used five separate times. If it was by design, accept my apology. If it was not, then maybe I’ve repaid you for some of the past help you’ve given me. Pendright ( talk) 00:06, 10 October 2013 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, in recognition of your dedication in reviewing 27 Military History good article nominations, peer review requests, A-Class nominations and/or Featured Article candidates during the period July to September 2013, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Well done and thanks, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 05:25, 10 October 2013 (UTC) |
My dear Sturmvogel, I've undone your edit at Iowa-class battleship. Neither Wikipedia:WikiProject Ships/Guidelines nor Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide say that cites should not be in the infobox. What Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide does say is that "Citations do not need to be provided in the infobox if the information is repeated in the body of the article and cited there (my italics)", and at a glance, at least some of the information and cites you removed from the article are not in the text. The ones that I tested are the cost per ship and the displacement, but I'm guessing there will be others. Losing those cites is damaging to the article.
I agree that infoboxes look smarter if the cite is in the text, but I don't think that's the case here. If I'm wrong, just go and revert my undo - I trust your judgement. Shem ( talk) 17:53, 12 October 2013 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:Volkov Yartsev VYa-23.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. -- Тимофей ЛееСуда. 21:25, 17 October 2013 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,331 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. Thanks, Bencherlite Talk 17:59, 18 October 2013 (UTC)
I have a question on fate. According to all my sources and what I find in the internet her commander Joachim Wünning was killed on 22 September 1944. The article states that the attack occured on the 29 September. Who is right? Do you know? MisterBee1966 ( talk) 12:18, 24 October 2013 (UTC)
Hello In List of aircraft maintenance carriers of the Royal Navy there is info:
four × twin, five × single 20 mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft guns
But in HMS Unicorn (I72) there is info
2 × 2, 8 × 1 – 20 mm Oerlikon anti-aircraft cannon
and
Close-range air defence was provided by twelve 20 mm Oerlikon autocannon, in two twin mounts and eight single ones.
So what is correct? PMG ( talk) 12:07, 29 October 2013 (UTC)
So I saw what you wrote at the Battlecruisers of the World nomination and I can try to be able to close the nomination before the end of October. I can't promise it due to scheduling for my classes on the 31st, but if I'm able to get time, I can try to close it up. Your help with the closing and all that would be very much helpful. So hopefully this can be done on time. GamerPro64 22:17, 30 October 2013 (UTC)
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth ( submissions). Our final nine were as follows:
All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:
Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.
Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email) and The ed17 ( talk • email) 00:33, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
Regarding your checking of articles at Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Buster40004 - were the articles OK? Articles without copyright problems get an check, not a . - The Bushranger One ping only 02:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
On 3 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article North American AJ Savage, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Composite Squadron 6 of the United States Navy deployed two North American AJ Savage (pictured) bombers to K-3 Air Base in Korea in July 1953 to act as a nuclear deterrent? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/North American AJ Savage. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 16:02, 3 November 2013 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Japanese aircraft carrier Shinano to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 11:30, 4 November 2013 (UTC)
The Titan's Cross in Silver | ||
On behalf of Operation Majestic Titan and its members, it gives me great pleasure to bestow upon you this Titan's Cross in Silver for your dedication and years long effort in working with battlecruiser articles, culminating in the creation, nomination, and passage of the Featured Topic Battlecruisers of the World. TomStar81 ( Talk) 10:51, 11 November 2013 (UTC) |
I understand von Manstein was a German national. However I don't understand how he can not be considered Polish as well. I defer to your judgment that he didn't consider himself Polish even though I don't know how you know this. I just thought it was interesting that the article mentioned he was Polish considering the Nazi brutality towards the Poles. I will give it a rest. Thanks. Pistolpierre ( talk) 00:31, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
Please revert yourself in this and other articles. That discussion is closed. Thank you. Drmies ( talk) 04:18, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
That hyphen really doesn't look right to me. The attributes "horizontal" and "return connecting rod" are independent of one another, hyphenating them obstructs the fact. Gatoclass ( talk) 04:34, 16 November 2013 (UTC)
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
Thank you for all of your work and your patience with me while I reviewed Japanese ironclad Hiei. It really is appreciated. Sasuke Sarutobi ( talk) 15:11, 17 November 2013 (UTC) |
Hello, you may remember me from the Tosa FAC. I started this earlier intending to write about the Nile cruise ship before I realized that there were several of the same name. I had a go at creating a starter article here but it could use somebody with expertise in ships to improve it. I'm not sure whether separate articles would be preferred, the 1854 ship I'd say probably has enough for a separate article. I was thinking of creating a general Nile cruise ships article for the smaller steamer. I'm also not sure it the wreck website is a RS, but seemed to be good for facts and figures. Can you help improve this? ♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:13, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
I tried to add an infobox to SS Nubia (1854) but it's broken and left-aligned. Can somebody fix it. The data is from the P&O source, wasn't sure what the breadth of the ship it, I put under beam for now. Can you check, not familiar with using that infobox!♦ Dr. Blofeld 21:15, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
On 20 November 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Japanese ironclad Hiei, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that during the Japanese invasion of Taiwan in 1895, the ironclad Hiei (pictured) participated in the bombardment of the Chinese coastal forts at Takow ( Kaohsiung)? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese ironclad Hiei. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 08:12, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
Following on from a conversation in which you participated over a year ago, a new discussion regarding the Expansion of TFL on the main page has been started. Your views on this matter would be appreciated. – SchroCat ( talk) 09:49, 20 November 2013 (UTC)
This is a note to let the main editors of Japanese aircraft carrier Akagi know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 7, 2013. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite ( talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 7, 2013. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:
Akagi was the second aircraft carrier of the Imperial Japanese Navy (IJN) to enter service, and the first large or "fleet" carrier. She was converted to an aircraft carrier while still under construction to comply with the Washington Naval Treaty of 1922, and figured prominently in the development of the IJN's revolutionary doctrine that grouped carriers together, concentrating their air power. The ship and her aircraft first saw combat during the Second Sino-Japanese War in the late 1930s. During the Pacific War, she took part in the Attack on Pearl Harbor on 7 December 1941 and the invasion of Rabaul in the Southwest Pacific in January 1942 as flagship of the First Air Fleet. Over the next several months her aircraft bombed Darwin, Australia, assisted in the conquest of the Dutch East Indies, and helped sink a British heavy cruiser and an Australian destroyer in the Indian Ocean Raid. After bombarding American forces on Midway Atoll during the Battle of Midway in June, Akagi and the other carriers were attacked by aircraft from Midway and three American carriers. Akagi was severely damaged, and she was scuttled by Japanese destroyers to prevent her from falling into enemy hands. ( Full article...)
UcuchaBot ( talk) 23:01, 21 November 2013 (UTC)
JOJ Hutton 12:12, 24 November 2013 (UTC)
If the article on a gun is linked in a ship article, it's a bit superfluous to add in a conversion as well. To cover all the bases, I did generally add a conversion later when discussing gun performance data. So you might want to look over those articles to which you've added them and see if they were converted elsewhere in the article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:02, 28 November 2013 (UTC)
Hi, Are you planning on developing this article to B class (or higher) standard? If so, I have a few extra photos of her interior and exterior which I took when I visited the Dutch Naval Museum in 2011 I could upload to Commons. Her interior wasn't very impressive though. Nick-D ( talk) 07:01, 29 November 2013 (UTC)
On 6 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Russian monitor Edinorog, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the hulk of the Russian monitor Edinorog was transferred to the Kronstadt Yacht Club in 1957? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russian monitor Edinorog. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:02, 6 December 2013 (UTC)
On 9 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charodeika-class monitor, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the contracts for the two Charodeika-class monitors were transferred to their designer, Charles Mitchell, upon the death of their builder, S. G. Kudriavtsev, in August 1865? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Charodeika-class monitor. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 11:08, 9 December 2013 (UTC)
Sturmvogel, I see your Template:Infobox ship begin/Usage guide, but I think it contradicts itself. It says "prime movers" should be under "power", but a steam engine is a prime mover, and that comes under "propulsion". It's a combination of the boiler (the pressure and saturation of the steam) and the steam engine (the type of expansion used, the bore and throw of the cylinder, and other factors) that combine to produce the power generated. I think the guidance works better for modern ships than steam ships. But I'm happy to let your edit stand. Thanks for the interest. Shem ( talk) 21:42, 10 December 2013 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
You have been and continue doing a great job both as a Wiki editor and administrator. Thanks and keep up with it. Have a Happy Hoildays & NewYear. DPdH ( talk) 23:01, 11 December 2013 (UTC) |
On 16 December 2013, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Beagle (H30), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the British destroyer HMS Beagle rescued 600 survivors of the ocean liner Lancastria, sunk by German aircraft during the evacuation of St. Nazaire on 17 June 1940? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Beagle (H30). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
Callanecc ( talk • contribs • logs) 03:32, 16 December 2013 (UTC)
Happy Holidays | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 23:55, 21 December 2013 (UTC) |
Thanks, hope that yours are joyous as well.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:39, 22 December 2013 (UTC)
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 23:20, 23 December 2013 (UTC)
Tomobe03 (
talk) is wishing you a
Merry
Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes
WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a
Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!
Spread the Christmas cheer by adding {{ subst:Xmas5}} to their talk page with a friendly message.
Best wishes for the holidays and a very successful new year!-- Tomobe03 ( talk) 15:40, 25 December 2013 (UTC)
Enough of this back and forth. You don't want me doing what I'm doing? Fine. Then point me in the direction of something useful I can do. Magus732 ( talk) 20:01, 30 December 2013 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for his great efforts in the December 2013 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 109 points from 16 articles. Well done! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 01:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC) |
Hey, you might be interested in this book, as it is where I got that information from. I guess it does directly contradict what's on the page. Kevin Rutherford ( talk) 23:58, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
The previous discussion regarding an extension of TFLs on the front page in which you commented, has moved on to an RfC on the Main Page. Your comments and suggestions are once again welcome on this issue. - SchroCat ( talk) 11:05, 6 January 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period October–December 2013, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook an incredible 31 reviews. Without reviewers it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. AustralianRupert ( talk) 04:06, 8 January 2014 (UTC) |
Hi Sturm, The ACR hasn't initiated prperly, "undergoing" bit is still red. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 04:31, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks again for the GA review. As a question, do you think that this article has legs for A-class, or is it a bit too thin? I've included just about everything I've been able to find on it, so there isn't much scope to extend it. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 07:11, 13 January 2014 (UTC)
Hi everyone, I've noticed that a few of you haven't updated your totals as several reviews have passed but on the backlog page, it still says that the article is under review or on hold.
Please update your totals and continue to do so until February 1. If the status of a review is under review or on hold according to the backlog page, even though the article may have passed/failed, it will not count towards your final total.
For those that made pledges during the drive, the final donation amount will be determined sometime in February.
Thank-you.Sent by Dom497 using MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 21:17, 23 January 2014 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel 66, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition began on 1 January. There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn ( talk · contribs), The ed17 ( talk · contribs) and Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 14:36, 26 January 2014 (UTC)
USS Mahan (DD-364) article is now a GA. Thank you for helping to bring this about. Pendright ( talk) 00:08, 29 January 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Godot13 ( submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:
Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.
Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)
The Good Article Reviewer's Medal of Merit | ||
For reviewing 9 Good article nominations during the December 2013 GAN Backlog Drive!-- Dom497 ( talk) 15:22, 3 February 2014 (UTC) |
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Russian battleship Retvizan to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,311 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. Bencherlite Talk 11:04, 4 February 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for his fine efforts in the January 2014 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 79 points from 13 articles. Well done! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 11:02, 6 February 2014 (UTC) |
On 8 February 2014, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Engadine (1911), which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the British seaplane tender Engadine carried a pigeon loft that housed carrier pigeons to be used by her aircraft if their wireless was broken? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Engadine (1911). You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page ( here's how, quick check) and it will be added to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 21:02, 8 February 2014 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, I finally got around to rewriting the service history section for the article. Let me know if you think it needs more work. I'll do the intro later today or tomorrow and we can think about putting in through the review process once we're happy with it. Parsecboy ( talk) 15:26, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Hey, is there a template to indicate an infobox is needed? An article I just edited, Otranto Barrage, is missing one, and I wondered if I could leave a template so someone can put one in later, or should I just add the infobox myself? Magus732 ( talk) 21:00, 9 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturm- I've done my QPQ, could you drop by to give me my tick? Thanks! J Milburn ( talk) 23:00, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the other coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am very pleased to award you the A-Class medal with swords to recognise your work in developing the Japanese battleship Asahi, Russian battleship Retvizan, and Japanese aircraft carrier Sōryū articles to A-class standard. These are impressive articles on Navies which are rather under-represented. Nick-D ( talk) 10:35, 12 February 2014 (UTC) |
I was doing a last-second run through Google Books (which I probably should have done back in '11), and I've found two sources giving different values for the Poltava's tonnage, differing from both McLaughlin and each other. I presumed one of them might have been the slimmed-down weight after refloating, but I dunno where to cram the second one. Buggie111 ( talk) 01:23, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, well done on the GAs HMS Implacable (R86) and HMS Vindictive (1918). Would you mind if I nominated them for DYK? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 19:42, 25 February 2014 (UTC)
Sturmvogel, per WP:CITESHORT there are two types of short citation, one which gives the publication date, and the other that gives the date of publication. I am indeed "changing the cite style" - to a correct one. What I don't understand is why you'd revert a change that is an obvious improvement in line with the style guide. Given the nature of this change, I'll revert while awaiting your response - but if you feel that strongly about it, feel free to change it back again - although I'd be very interested to hear your reason why. Shem ( talk) 19:59, 26 February 2014 (UTC)
And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:
Other competitors of note include:
After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)
On 3 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Implacable (R86), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that HMS Implacable (pictured from above) was the base of Seafires, Hornets, and Fireflies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Implacable (R86). 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) 08:02, 3 March 2014 (UTC)
On 5 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Cressy (1899), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that when HMS Cressey was sunk, 560 men were killed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Cressy (1899). 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 16:02, 5 March 2014 (UTC)
On 7 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Vindictive (1918), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that HMS Vindictive served as four different types of ship? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Vindictive (1918). 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 16:02, 7 March 2014 (UTC)
Hope all is well. Have you had the opportunity to re-read three-cent nickel? -- Wehwalt ( talk) 15:16, 8 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. I do appreciate any advice. Although I do sometimes forget to add the signature, I have gotten better lately. The most recent instance, however, was not because I forgot to sign (I assume that is the one you refer to... Kongo-class battleship?). I DID sign, and then clicked "preview". Then I saved my post. I came back a minute later to edit my post, and it had an autosign, even though I DID type the four tildes. That has happened before. Not sure why. And while I'm here and on the subject, a question I've wanted to put forth to a knowledgeable Wikipedian for some time: why, if you have a "bot" that will automatically add your signature anyway, is it necessary to manually add a signature? Is it just a matter of form? I'm genuinely curious about this. Anyway, I do try to remember to sign my posts. 90% of the time I succeed, and I'm getting more used to it. But I don't ever not sign intentionally..45Colt 21:30, 8 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt ( talk • contribs)
Edit: Okay...I see. Although I signed that comment, it registers as not being signed. So I have to sign it AFTER I click "preview comment"? .45Colt 21:35, 8 March 2014 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by .45Colt ( talk • contribs)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Japanese aircraft carrier Sōryū to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 10:32, 10 March 2014 (UTC)
Repeat congratulations for Russian battleship Peresvet, and a little reminder re anniversary plans... when time permits. Thanks, Bencherlite Talk 22:56, 9 June 2014 (UTC)
The creation of a separate section, 'Loss', was simply following what appeared to be established Wikipedia practice, viz. HMS Barham (04), HMS Ark Royal (91). The Simon's Bay photograph is indeed of minor importance, its inclusion simply a means of preserving it, and the occasion, for posterity. Ptelea ( talk) 15:49, 11 March 2014 (UTC)
On 15 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Good Hope (1901), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that four of the midshipmen aboard the HMS Good Hope became the first casualties of the Royal Canadian Navy when she sank in the Battle of Coronel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Good Hope (1901). 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. |
Thank you for the new article Victuallers ( talk) 08:02, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
On 17 March 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Euryalus (1901), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the completion of the armoured cruiser HMS Euryalus was severely delayed by multiple accidents including a fire, slipping off her blocks in drydock, and colliding with another vessel? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Euryalus (1901). 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. |
Well, thank you for the article Victuallers ( talk) 16:03, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
As the current second and third places in this round of the WikiCup, and not separated by many points, I hereby challenge thee to a duel for supremacy! Winner to be decided at the end of this round. Name thy wager. Adam Cuerden ( talk) 12:53, 19 March 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for all your great contributions! When you are using the
Subscription required template, it should be placed inside the ref tag, just before the </ref>
rather outside the ref tag, per the template documentation. --
HarryHenryGebel (
talk) 13:04, 20 March 2014 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for scoring 3,160 points during the February–March 2014 backlog drive, I hereby award you this barnstar. AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC) |
The Golden Wiki | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for scoring the most points during the February–March 2014 backlog drive, I hereby award you this Golden Wiki. Congratulations! AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:07, 22 March 2014 (UTC) |
Sturmvogel 66, this needs your attention. If you're still waiting for the info from three weeks ago (the last time I posted here), then it's probably time to close it as unsuccessful. If that was already taken care of, then it may be ready to close as successful, or need a bit more work. One way or the other, some posting to the review page would be welcome. Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 22:34, 22 March 2014 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, I thought you might be interested in this. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:08, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, I know you are active in ship articles, so hope you don't mind me asking some questions:
Thanks, Mat ty. 007 14:45, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much. I don't understand all the stuff on guns. When I have de-jerkified the prose a little, could I take it to GAN? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:08, 1 April 2014 (UTC)
A quick update as we are half way through round two of this year's competition. WikiCup newcomer Godot13 ( submissions) (Pool E) leads, having produced a massive set of featured pictures for Silver certificate (United States), an article also brought to featured list status. Former finalist Adam Cuerden ( submissions) (Pool G) is in second, which he owes mostly to his work with historical images, including a number of images from Urania's Mirror, an article also brought to good status. 2010 champion (Pool C) is third overall, thanks to contributions relating to naval history, including the newly featured Japanese battleship Nagato. Cliftonian ( submissions), who currently leads Pool A and is sixth overall, takes the title for the highest scoring individual article of the competition so far, with the top importance featured article Ian Smith.
With 26 people having already scored over 100 points, it is likely that well over 100 points will be needed to secure a place in round 3. Recent years have required 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) and 100 (2010). Remember that only 64 will progress to round 3 at the end of April. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page; if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 22:55, 31 March 2014 (UTC)
The Teamwork Barnstar | |
Thank you very much for all your detailed help working out how to improve Algerine, I appreciate it very much. All the best, Mat ty. 007 18:10, 1 April 2014 (UTC) |
Hi again, paragraphs two and three are largely copyvios of [3], should it be CSDed or AFDed on the assumption the entire thing is? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 11:40, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the help. Do you reckon it could be a GA, as again there is a notable lack of info on him? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 13:02, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
Were awarded their nation's second-highest award for valour (such as the Navy Cross) multiple timesat the essay linked from the GNG for military people. Just to note, I am not finished with it yet, I have a fair bit more to do. Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:13, 4 April 2014 (UTC)
On 3 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Andrea Doria-class battleship, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Italy's Andrea Doria-class battleships were attacked by Swordfish during the Battle of Taranto? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Andrea Doria-class battleship. 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 08:03, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
Would you by any chance have time and inclination to look over this article? Best,-- Wehwalt ( talk) 20:25, 5 April 2014 (UTC)
On 6 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Formidable (67), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the British aircraft carrier HMS Formidable (pictured) became known as "The Ship That Launched Herself" due to a surprising mishap before her launching ceremony? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Formidable (67). 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. |
Thank you for this contribution Victuallers ( talk) 00:02, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
On 10 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article HMS Algerine (J213), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/HMS Algerine (J213). 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. |
Allen3 talk 10:52, 10 April 2014 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing it today. I also have access to ProQuest, that has some contemporary news article, mostly dealing with her sinking, but I see one or two discussing her service with Japan. Please send me an email so I may send you these.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 13:34, 12 April 2014 (UTC)
I've looked over a number of warship articles, and gun descriptions of the form 8"/55 caliber (sometimes leaving out the slash) appear to be in very common use. Do you really want to go on a one-man crusade to change all the gun descriptions to the clumsier form, 55-caliber 8" gun? It's no clearer for beginners, and it's irritating to nonbeginners familiar with the other form. -- Yaush ( talk) 02:38, 15 April 2014 (UTC)
On 17 April 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Japanese ironclad Fusō, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Japanese ironclad Fusō sank after colliding with two ships during a storm when her anchor chain broke on 29 October 1897? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Japanese ironclad Fusō. 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. |
HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:22, 16 April 2014 (UTC) 00:03, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hey Sturmvogel, regarding these changes, did the British remove a flying-off platform or a flying bridge from between the turrets? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:17, 17 April 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel 66, I currently have the two books you recommended, but the Rohwer one doesn't have much info to expand the article with. Do you think it will pass GA as it is? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 15:53, 19 April 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
The WikiChevrons are hereby bestowed upon Sturmvogel 66 for his tremendous efforts in the March 2014 Military History monthly article writing contest, placing first with a total of 166 points from 28 articles. Well done! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:26, 20 April 2014 (UTC) |
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class medal with Swords to recognise your fine work in developing the Japanese battleship Nagato, Russian battleship Poltava (1894), and Russian battleship Peresvet articles to A-class status. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:58, 21 April 2014 (UTC) |
Thank for your help. Pendright ( talk) 00:27, 23 April 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook an outstanding 28 reviews. Without reviewers it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Cheers, AustralianRupert ( talk) 22:33, 3 May 2014 (UTC) |
Round 3 of the 2014 WikiCup has just begun; 32 competitors remain. Pool G's Adam Cuerden ( submissions) was Round 2's highest scorer, with a large number of featured picture credits. In March/April, he restored star charts from Urania's Mirror, lithographs of various warships (such as SMS Gefion) and assorted other historical media. Second overall was Pool E's Godot13 ( submissions), whose featured list Silver certificate (United States) contains dozens of scans of banknotes recently promoted to featured picture status. Third was Pool G's ChrisGualtieri ( submissions) who has produced a large number of good articles, many, including Falkner Island, on Connecticut-related topics. Other successful participants included Cliftonian ( submissions), who saw three articles (including the top-importance Ian Smith) through featured article candidacies, and Caponer ( submissions), who saw three lists (including the beautifully-illustrated list of plantations in West Virginia) through featured list candidacies. High-importance good articles promoted this round include narwhal from Reid,iain james ( submissions), tiger from Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) and The Lion King from Igordebraga ( submissions). We also saw our first featured topic points of the competition, awarded to Czar ( submissions) and Red Phoenix ( submissions) for their work on the Sega Genesis topic. No points have been claimed so far for good topics or featured portals.
192 was our lowest qualifying score, again showing that this WikiCup is the most competitive ever. In previous years, 123 (2013), 65 (2012), 41 (2011) or 100 (2010) secured a place in Round 3. Pool H was the strongest performer, with all but one of its members advancing, while only the two highest scorers in Pools G and F advanced. At the end of June, 16 users will advance into the semi-finals. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk • email), The ed17 ( talk • email) and Miyagawa ( talk • email) 17:57, 4 May 2014 (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:
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) 00:30, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel66; sorry if I'm so late, considering the subject. Your late inquiry together with User:Parsecboy, in Talk:Colbert-class_ironclad/GA1: probably that issue 3e-livraison-1878 (Plan de l'aff t installé au sabord). Make well; -- Askedonty ( talk) 18:41, 10 May 2014 (UTC)
On 13 May 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article SS Kanguroo, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the French heavy-lift ship SS Kanguroo had to have her bow dismantled to load the submarines that she was designed to transport? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/SS Kanguroo. 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. |
The DYK project ( nominate) 11:26, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
Thanks once again for taking the time to do the GA review for Battery White. I didn't realize just how long it'd taken until I saw your two messages juxtaposed—one from April 4, stating that you were going to do the review, and then one from May 13 letting me know that it'd passed. I apologize for taking so long to produce the map, and hope that it didn't cause you any inconvenience. Ammodramus ( talk) 23:01, 13 May 2014 (UTC)
The Special Barnstar | |
For reviewing 9 GAN's (for a total of 25 points) during the March 2014 Backlog Drive! Dom497 ( talk) 00:44, 15 May 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 01:12, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
Hello
There is article Japanese aircraft carrier Project Number G18. There is a source - ut I have checked and there is nothing about this specific class. I googled a little and here there is info that nobody knows anything, and here is a info that this is probably some class from World of warships and even they don`t know almost anything except class name. I am not sure if en.wiki should have entry about this class, and definetly I dont know how to handle request for deletion. Can you please, look at this article~and take care of it? PMG ( talk) 16:47, 15 May 2014 (UTC)
I edited, and will edit again, the Vanguard article specifically because I could not understand how that lead could possibly pass FA with that confusing and poorly written lead. It can certainly be improved, and I want to improve it. The fact that it passed FA means little, all articles can be improved, and "don't change it because it's FA" is precisely the sort of thing that is destroying the wiki.
So unless you have a very specific point about the inclusion, which clearly does improve the lead, I will consider further reverts to be edit warring.
Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:16, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
Oh, and to pre-flight: separating the first two sentences out emphasizes the historical place for this ship. Currently that is buried in other content. Further, as the lead does not currently state the date construction started, the fact that is was not completed during the war is somewhat meaningless - if it started in 1944 this would be an odd statement. By clearly stating when construction started, that it stopped and restarted and for what reason, context is added. There was also somewhat curious and confusing use of phrases and separation of sentences. So if you feel none of these changes are improvements, by all means, explain away. Maury Markowitz ( talk) 16:26, 16 May 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject I am very pleased to present you with your second WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves. This award is made in recognition of your continued sterling performance as a major contributor to our WikiProject. This has included two years as a Coordinator (September 2010 to September 2012), three A-Class Medals, five A-Class Medals with Oak Leaves, and five A-Class Medals with Swords. You topped the recent February-March backlog drive, are a regular winner of the monthly contest, are a consistent and keen reviewer, and provide wise advice on various aspects of the WikiProject to all and sundry. You don't engage in groupthink and you ask the hard questions. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 02:21, 19 May 2014 (UTC) |
Hi there. This is a message for CasLiber, HamiltonStone, SturmVogel and Crisco. Thanks for your help and feeback re: the Singora article. It achieved FA status on Saturday.
I got a message today saying the article will now appear on Wikipedia's home page on June 4. This surprised me. I read somewhere that it usually takes several months for featured articles to make it to the home page.
I've cleaned things up a bit. CasLiber and Crisco noted that the section about Persians in 17th century Siam looked out of place. I've deleted this paragraph.
I've also re-jigged the lead and added:
If you have time to briefly glance through it again, please do. I still feel the article can be improved prior to June 4.
Thanks again for your help. I've enjoyed doing this. I finished Oxford University almost exactly 30 years ago, so this has been an opportunity to cast aside some of the rust and dust that's built up over the years. Perhaps I'm not as good as I was, but I think I'm still just about okay!
I'll login from time to time. If you'd like a review, do please feel free to let me know.
Singora ( talk) 18:08, 19 May 2014 (UTC)
Been inactive for a while now looking to get back into the swing of things by touching up the King George V battleship main article.
Seeing as you have done nearly all the Italian battleship articles I was wondering if you could clarify which Italian battleships KGV and Howe escorted to Alexandria on 9-11 September 1943. Thurgate ( talk) 20:55, 25 May 2014 (UTC)
Regarding: I've got to figure out how to use this in one of my articles!, were you successful? Pdfpdf ( talk) 13:10, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, I was just informed and just wanted to let you know in case you didn't that the GA review of USS Monitor has just been initiated by Peacemaker67. -- Gwillhickers ( talk) 15:33, 28 May 2014 (UTC)
I saw this, and thought I bet Sturmvogel's worked on that. Low and behold you have! I've credited you in the DYK nom. Anyone else you'd advise crediting? (Just noticed that I'm beating you in the Cup! I expect you'll double my eventual score though, you produce loads of top quality ship GAs.) Thanks, Mat ty. 007 18:54, 29 May 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Russian battleship Poltava (1894) to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 18:25, 1 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you for commenting Kronan FAC. I really appreciate all the helpful pointers.
Peter Isotalo 16:36, 4 June 2014 (UTC)
On 6 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Ise-class battleship, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that despite having supporting air groups Yokosuka D4Y dive bombers and Aichi E16A reconnaissance aircraft, neither of the Ise-class battleships used them in combat? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Ise-class battleship. 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) 11:51, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
I have made a review of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Andrea Doria-class battleship/archive1. May I ask for a review of Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/2013 Rosario gas explosion/archive1 in return? Cambalachero ( talk) 14:27, 11 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel 66,
I just wondered if you might be able to give the article French prisoners of war in World War II, currently being reviewed, a look over? I'd be very grateful! Brigade Piron ( talk) 07:01, 14 June 2014 (UTC)
Hope all is well. If you have a moment, could you take the second glance at Liberty Head double eagle you were kind enough to say you would do?-- Wehwalt ( talk) 15:52, 15 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel 66, I've managed to scan and upload the Pevensey Castle map I mentioned earlier, albeit in four segments that are going to need cleaning up and stitching together. See my recent contributions for the raw scans. I'm going to see if I can get some help with processing them. Prioryman ( talk) 21:46, 17 June 2014 (UTC)
On 19 June 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Russian monitor Rusalka, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after the Russian monitor Rusalka sank, all that was found in the immediate aftermath were a few lifebuoys, and a sailor's corpse in a dinghy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russian monitor Rusalka. 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) 12:53, 19 June 2014 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I was just going through the articles you have worked on and I was greatly impressed. You're a terrific editor WonderBoy1998 ( talk) 10:02, 24 June 2014 (UTC) |
After an extremely close race, Round 3 is over. 244 points secured a place in Round 4, which is comparable to previous years- 321 was required in 2013, while 243 points were needed in 2012. Pool C's Godot13 ( submissions) was the round's highest scorer, mostly due to a 32 featured pictures, including both scans and photographs. Also from Pool C, Casliber ( submissions) finished second overall, claiming three featured articles, including the high-importance Grus (constellation). Third place was Pool B's , whose contributions included featured articles Russian battleship Poltava (1894) and Russian battleship Peresvet. Pool C saw the highest number of participants advance, with six out of eight making it to the next round.
The round saw this year's first featured portal, with Sven Manguard ( submissions) taking Portal:Literature to featured status. The round also saw the first good topic points, thanks to 12george1 ( submissions) and the 2013 Atlantic hurricane season. This means that all content types have been claimed this year. Other contributions of note this round include a featured topic on Maya Angelou's autobiographies from Figureskatingfan ( submissions), a good article on the noted Czech footballer Tomáš Rosický from Cloudz679 ( submissions) and a now-featured video game screenshot, freely released due to the efforts of Sven Manguard ( submissions).
The judges would like to remind participants to update submission pages promptly. This means that content can be checked, and allows those following the competition (including those participating) to keep track of scores effectively. This round has seen discussion about various aspects of the WikiCup's rules and procedures. Those interested in the competition can be assured that formal discussions about how next year's competition will work will be opened shortly, and all are welcome to voice their views then. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk · contribs) The ed17 ( talk · contribs) and Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 18:48, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Hi, thanks for contacting me about this matter; I've provided a response in my talk page, and also I've added a link with additional info about the ship. Regards, DPdH ( talk) 14:06, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
You seriously need another archive. Jodosma (talk) 19:24, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
I noticed your revert of my edit of 118th Jäger Division (Wehrmacht) in which you dispute my spelling of Battalion. I have an English/German dictionary which gives "Bataillon" as a correct spelling. What do you think we should do? Jodosma (talk) 19:40, 3 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, I wonder if you can find anything on this bloke? I've got this, a mention in a book, and several mentions in the London Gazette. No Wikipedia page, no obits... He was knighted and a vice-admiral apparently, can you find anything? Thanks, Mat ty. 007 16:18, 6 July 2014 (UTC)
Since you provided helpful comments and/or reviewing in related quality assessments, I'm dropping a notice that battle of Öland is now an FAC. Please feel free to drop by with more input!
sincerely,
Peter
Isotalo 05:43, 7 July 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period April–June 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook 18 reviews. Without reviewers it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 02:55, 8 July 2014 (UTC) |
A file that you uploaded or altered, File:KronshtadtBattlecruiser.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you object to the listing for any reason. Thank you. Sfan00 IMG ( talk) 08:41, 16 July 2014 (UTC)
As you may know, I write for the Signpost, basically Wikipedia's newsletter. I'd like to do a feature on the semifinalists, would you be willing to provide, say, 250 to 500 words saying: (1.) Why did you join the Wikicup? (2.) What you you hope to get out of it? and (3.) Which of your contributions to the Wikicup are your favourites?
Not quite sure how I'll order them - I'll probably make the ed17 decide, as, you know, Conflict of Interest: I am a semifinalist. I'd imagine point order or alphabetical or the like.
Can you please reply at Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2014-07-30/Wikicup#Sturmvogel 66? Thanks! Adam Cuerden ( talk) 00:25, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi,Sir.I'm translating your article LT vz. 34 to Chinese.But there is a word which I can't understand very well:
The LT vz. 34 was assembled from a framework of steel "angle iron" beams, to which armor plates were riveted. A 3 mm (0.12 in) firewall separated the engine compartment from the crew. A door allowed access to the engine from the crew compartment. It also had ventilation openings that could be closed
So now,can you tell me What does the "It" mean? the firewall? the door?or others?
thanks. I can't speak English very well.I hope that you can understand what I mean...-- パンツァー VI-II ❂ Fu7ラジオ❂In the Republic of China 103rd.民國103年 05:34, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class medal with Swords to recognise your fine work in developing the Andrea Doria-class battleship, HMS Indefatigable (R10), and Nagato-class battleship articles to A-class status. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:18, 27 July 2014 (UTC) |
Sorry for this being late as I just came across this today. So I just found out that Petropavlovsk class battleships is now a Featured Topic thanks in part to Russian battleship Poltava (1894) becoming a Featured Article in May. Congrats on the achievement. GamerPro64 17:45, 30 July 2014 (UTC)
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in a group interview in the upcoming August issue of The Bugle with editors who work on articles concerning World War I. We're conducting this interview to mark the centenary of the war, and it forms part of a semi-regular series of interviews on thematic topics. If you're able to participate, I'd be grateful if you could post responses to the questions at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/News/August 2014/Interview by next Sunday 17 July. Please let me know if you have any questions about this. Regards, Nick-D ( talk) 10:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
With regards to Challenge and Burden, and our conversation on the military history talk page, you might find Wikipedia_talk:Verifiability#Endless reverts interesting, as it will give you an insight on how others interpret WP:PROVEIT -- PBS ( talk) 17:25, 2 August 2014 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel.
Please stop reverting perfectly good corrections of an article. The fact that an article is FA does not necessarily mean that it is flawless, nor does it mean that it's "frozen" at its current status. Errors can be missed – and found and corrected anytime.
The change I did is supported by wikipedia guidelines, specifically WP:Copyedit, section "Common mistakes to fix", subsection "Punctuation" (which I pointed out to you in my previous edit summary).
See for instance the first example:
Did you actually read this, and still decided to re-introduce the error?
I'm going to fix this again now. I hope you don't revert it again after this. If you do, I will have no choice but to report you for edit-warring, which might lead to a block.
Cheers.
HandsomeFella ( talk) 09:22, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
I hope to have addressed your last comment. Can you please check again? Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 15:21, 12 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel, was wondering if you would mind taking a look at Talk:South Dakota-class battleship (1920)#Missing references. We were hoping you still had a copy of the "CV-2 Lex and CV-3 Sara" from 1977 Warship International, and could say whether that's the appropriate reference for the South Dakota article. Thanks! — Huntster ( t @ c) 04:30, 15 August 2014 (UTC)
Please note that when forking content from one article to another our license requires that you provide attribution unless you are the sole author. This is done through linking to the original article in edit summary with an explanation that content is copied. Please see Wikipedia:Copying within Wikipedia for details.-- Jac16888 Talk 22:52, 16 August 2014 (UTC)
Hi mate, were you still going to GA review No. 5 Elementary Flying Training School RAAF? Also are you still keen to jointly take Nairana to ACR once I get any further info from Denny's? Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:30, 24 August 2014 (UTC)
On 31 August 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Russian monitor Lava, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Russian monitor Lava served as a barracks ship and a mine-storage hulk before she was converted into a hospital ship after being struck from the Navy List in 1900? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russian monitor Lava. 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) 12:04, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Nagato-class battleship to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR (specific and non-specific date slots) and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. Bencherlite Talk 13:47, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey dude, I've found a few WWI ship images on the Internet Archive (chapter 12). Thought you might be interested. cc @ Parsecboy:. Hope you're doing well! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:37, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
Hello
Because of my level of English I am not sure - but is this edit correct? PMG ( talk) 17:18, 10 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey, I'm pretty well tapped out on what I can mine from Google Books - anything you can add to the service history section would be appreciated. Parsecboy ( talk) 18:16, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
On 13 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Admiral Spiridov-class monitor, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the role of the two Admiral Spiridov-class monitors in Russian war plans during the 1890s was to defend the Gulf of Riga against an anticipated German amphibious landing? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Admiral Spiridov-class monitor. 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) 12:03, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
for USS Saratoga (CV-3), Conte di Cavour-class battleship and HMS Warrior (1860), all of which were promoted to A-class between January and June 2013. Peacemaker67 ( send... over) 10:21, 16 September 2014 (UTC) |
On 19 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article French cruiser Amiral Charner, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Italian cargo liner SS Bosnia pulled off the French armored cruiser Amiral Charner on 3 March 1915 after the warship had run aground under enemy fire off Dedeagatch, Bulgaria? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/French cruiser Amiral Charner. 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) 13:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
On 19 September 2014, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article SS Bosnia (1898), which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Italian cargo liner SS Bosnia pulled off the French armored cruiser Amiral Charner on 3 March 1915 after the warship had run aground under enemy fire off Dedeagatch, Bulgaria? 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) 13:04, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:07, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
A quick note to say that as of this evening you're in the top ten, with 150 points - and there's three days still to go, so if you've any more to add please get them in soon :-). Thanks for the contributions! Andrew Gray ( talk) 22:26, 27 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sturm, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. Thanks for standing and all the best for the coming year. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 12:07, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
In one month's time, we will know our WikiCup 2014 champion. Newcomer Godot13 ( submissions) has taken a strong lead with a featured list ( historical coats of arms of the U.S. states from 1876) and a raft of featured pictures. Reigning champion Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) is in second place with a number of high-importance biology articles, including new FA Isopoda and new GA least weasel. Casliber ( submissions), who is in his fifth WikiCup final, is in third, with featured articles Pictor and Epacris impressa.
Signups for the 2015 WikiCup are open. All Wikipedians, new and experienced, are warmly invited to sign up for the competition. Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may also like to sign up for the GA Cup, a new WikiCup-inspired competition which revolves around completing good article reviews. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk · contribs) The ed17 ( talk · contribs) and Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 22:11, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period July to September 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook a very impressive 18 reviews. Without reviewers like you it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high-quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 14:04, 2 October 2014 (UTC) |
The Stub Barnstar | ||
To Sturmvogel 66, thanks for getting involved in the Stub Contest and improving a bunch of stubs. Cheers, Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 20:13, 8 October 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks, Cas.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 20:24, 8 October 2014 (UTC)
This is to inform you that Conte di Cavour-class battleship, which you nominated at WP:FAC, will appear on the Wikipedia Main Page as Today's Featured Article on 23 October 2014. The proposed main page blurb is here; you may amend if necessary. Please check for dead links and other possible faults before the appearance date. Brianboulton ( talk) 08:43, 15 October 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the note; I've requested clarification at my talk page. Doremo ( talk) 13:51, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
I believe I have addressed all your points. Jonas Vinther ( speak to me!) 20:43, 25 October 2014 (UTC)
Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:32, 27 October 2014 (UTC)
Hi - would you please help clarify something here re. the Sicherheitsdienst (SD)? /info/en/?search=Talk:Sicherheitsdienst#POV_.2F_Improper_synthesis_.2F_OR_.28.3F.3F.29_.7C_Tasks_and_general_structure_-_plz_help.21.21_.28Oct_2014.29 THANK YOU!! 98.236.50.229 ( talk) 01:07, 30 October 2014 (UTC)
I largely agree with what you said on the WikiCup scoring page. In the final round everyone is hoping that the GA and FA reviews of their articles will get done in a timely fashion. However, I am not sure that DYKs are superior in that respect as currently there is a backlog of about 300 articles waiting for review. That I scored so many DYK points in the final round was because I flooded the DYK page with my nominations, doing two expanded, ancient stub articles a day during most of September, until late in the month it became apparent that FPs would win the Cup this year. Where we differ is that I looked at the scoring system and said to myself "how can I best exploit the bonus system?" whereas you chose to work on the kind of articles that interested you without much regard to the bonuses available. This resulted in my getting 1700 in bonuses in the final round while you received 84. Take away the bonus points and our scores are not that dissimilar.
Going forward, I don't much care how the article points and bonus points are allotted but I can see that articles and FPs are so unlike each other in the review process and the amount of work required that it is very difficult to decide on their relative scoring. In the end I think the judges will have to decide in the interest of the competition going forward. Not everyone will be happy. Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 14:36, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
The 2014 WikiCup champion is Godot13 ( submissions), who flew the flag of the Smithsonian Institution. This was Godot13's first WikiCup competition and, over the 10 months of the competition, he has produced (among other contributions) two featured lists and an incredible 292 featured pictures, including architectural photographs and scans of historical documents. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions), 2012 and 2013 WikiCup champion, came in second, having written a large number of biology-related articles. Casliber ( submissions), WikiCup finalist every year since 2010, finished in third.
A full list of our prize-winners follows:
Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have participated this year. We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk · contribs) The ed17 ( talk · contribs) and Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) 22:52, 4 November 2014 (UTC)
I would appreciate if you would fail the article. On second thought, the article still needs plenty of work and is not ready for GA-status. Jonas Vinther ( speak to me!) 17:17, 10 November 2014 (UTC)
Sturm, I am trying to understand your removal of the portal in the article. I don't understand why it would be redundant and if you could explain that then perhaps I will have learned something in the process. It is my intention to take Revenue Cutter Service articles and improve them to at least B class. If the citations were in place I feel that this article would pass B Class now unlike many of the USRC articles which are hasty cut and pastes from DANFS or the Coast Guard Historian's records. Help me to understand your revert and I would be grateful. I have put the same portal on several USRC and USCGC articles, but if there is a valid reason for not having it there then please explain that for me. I can only assume that the revert was done in good faith, but fail to understand the reasoning. Cuprum17 ( talk) 18:49, 13 November 2014 (UTC)
In this diff you say in your edit summary that "Bibliography is not Further reading", but what else is it? The books don't appear to have been used in the construction of the article, and certainly aren't cited anyway. Caiaphodus ( talk) 18:05, 28 November 2014 (UTC)
Hello everyone, and may we wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2015 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. We have a few important announcements concerning the future of the WikiCup.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn ( talk), The ed17 ( talk), Miyagawa ( talk), Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) and Figureskatingfan ( talk) 18:54, 7 December 2014 (UTC)
Whatever beliefs you have, merry New Year! We all mark that with new calendars, whether we like it or not! Regards, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 14:59, 20 December 2014 (UTC)
2014 "Military historian of the Year" | ||
By order of the Members of the Military History WikiProject, for being a prolific writer and reviewing nearly five hundred good article nominations, I award you this Golden Wiki. Congratulations! TomStar81 ( Talk) 02:17, 22 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks, Tom!-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 05:27, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
To you and yours
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 14:42, 22 December 2014 (UTC)
Happy Holidays | ||
Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. - Ealdgyth - Talk 15:08, 25 December 2014 (UTC) |
We should all be that lucky!-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:37, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
Merry Christmas! Pendright ( talk) 16:19, 25 December 2014 (UTC) You're quite welcome. Hope you had a good Christmas as well!-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:39, 25 December 2014 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with swords | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Swords to recognise your fine work in developing the Russian battleship Pobeda, HMS Formidable (67), and HMS Illustrious (87) articles to A-class status. A great way to celebrate the end of 2014 and your military historian of the year award! Regards, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 09:11, 27 December 2014 (UTC) |
Thanks.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 12:34, 27 December 2014 (UTC)
Dear Sturmvogel 66,
HAPPY NEW YEAR Hoping 2015 will be a great year for you! Thank you for your contributions!
From a fellow editor,
FWiW Bzuk (
talk) 21:17, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
This message promotes WikiLove. Originally created by Nahnah4 (see "invisible note").
Thanks. And to you for yours.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 21:33, 1 January 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, I'm getting around to writing the individual ship articles for the Etna class, and saw that you used the Warship 2002-3 article when you did the class article. Is there any more info on the ships' careers that you didn't include in the article? If there is anything, would you mind adding it to the articles? I'm up through Vesuvio now and should get the last one done in the next day or so. Parsecboy ( talk) 13:13, 2 January 2015 (UTC)
Round one of the 2015 WikiCup has begun! So far we've had around 80 signups, which close on February 5. If you have not already signed up and want to do so, then you can add your name here. There have been changes to to several of the points scores for various categories, and the addition of Peer Reviews for the first time. These will work in the same manner as Good Article Reviews, and all of the changes are summarised here.
Remember that only the top 64 scoring competitors will make it through to the second round, and one of the new changes this year is that all scores must be claimed within two weeks of an article's promotion or appearance, so don't forget to add them to your submissions pages! If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, and you hope to get it promoted before the end of the round, please list it on
Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAN, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on
Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck!
Figureskatingfan (
talk ·
contribs),
Miyagawa (
talk ·
contribs) and
Sturmvogel 66 (
talk ·
contribs)
If you wish to opt-out of future mailings, please remove yourself from
the mailing list or alternatively to opt-out of all
massmessage mailings, you may add
Category:Opted-out of message delivery to your user talk page.
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 20:51, 2 January 2015 (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. The thread is " Requesting consensus review/input on dispute at WP:WikiCup". Thank you. -- ThaddeusB ( talk) 01:45, 5 January 2015 (UTC)
Re your reverting of my condensed copy about the Inquiries. I would suggest that since the discovery of the wreck, the alternative theories about torpedoes would become academic, and not suitable for the lede. Valetude ( talk) 11:53, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
OK, I agree with what you say. I think it 's better. In most cases I just kept the style of what was already written. You can change it without problem. Best Regards-- Zumalabe ( talk) 16:00, 7 January 2015 (UTC)
You indicated you were going to take a second look at the article.-- Wehwalt ( talk) 00:15, 11 January 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your comment on the talk page for this article. Just as a note: any editor can review and removed the CSD nom tag if they think it is not justified, except me, as I am the original page creator. - Ahunt ( talk) 21:56, 13 January 2015 (UTC)
Dear User talk:Sturmvogel 66. Please feel free to make that minor formatting change if that is what you prefer, as I have seen it elsewhere either way. Thank you. Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 21:19, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
Addendum: Just to be clear (as I know you are a stickler at warship pages) for some reason when you were done your 12 Dec. 2014 edits to armaments in the Yamoto Infobox that section - armaments - no longer displayed there. It was gone, invisible; contents went right from "Compliment" to "Armor". (See here: https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=Japanese_battleship_Yamato&diff=639635155&oldid=638494280) That's what got me editing that block of data, as I could not figure out why they didn't appear, and no amount of frigging around (even cut-and-pasting directly from the Yamoto Class page (where original class specs displayed)) could get rid of the bug. I was totally baffled, and probably tried a dozen separate edits (and combinations of syntax, data, etc.) before discovering that the armaments from the Musashi page (which were in an ugly format more or less like the one you had revised with your edits at the Yamoto page) would appear when cut-and-pasted to the Yamoto page. So I did so, then laboriously changed it to resemble in form the non-appearing format you had used, making adjustments for different wartime ship configurations, and so on.
Then I repeated that entire time-consuming process in reverse to improve the Musashi page's Infobox format.
It was only when viewing a page on another warship later that I noticed the use of what I thought was a simple 'x' as a separator, so that's what I went back applied to the Yamoto and Musashi pages. Even with new glasses I could not tell until reviewing a few other pages after seeing your revert that a multiplication symbol had been used on some.
If I seem exasperated at this point, perhaps you can understand why. As a gesture of good will I have gone ahead and made the desired symbol change at both pages. Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 22:08, 16 January 2015 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
For completing 17 reviews during October–December 2014, on behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 13:18, 24 January 2015 (UTC) |
The Featured Article Medal | ||
For your outstanding contributions to the Featured Articles Japanese aircraft carrier Ryūjō, Russian battleship Retvizan, Japanese aircraft carrier Sōryū, Japanese battleship Nagato, Russian battleship Poltava (1894), Russian battleship Peresvet, Andrea Doria-class battleship, HMS Indefatigable (R10), Nagato-class battleship, Russian battleship Pobeda, and HMS Formidable (67), all of which achieved FA status in 2014, you are hereby awarded this Featured Article Medal. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
The Half Barnstar | ||
For your collaboration with Parsecboy ( talk · contribs) on the Featured Article Andrea Doria-class battleship, you are hereby awarded the Left Half of the Half Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
WikiProject Ships Barnstar | ||
In honor and recognition of your outstanding contributions to ship articles during 2014, you are hereby awarded this Ships Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
The Epic Barnstar | ||
For your 2014 contributions to multiple history related articles you are hereby award this Epic Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 06:31, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
The Half Barnstar | ||
For your collaboration with Buggie111 ( talk · contribs) on the Featured Article Petropavlovsk-class battleships, you are hereby awarded the Right Half of the Half Barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | ||
For your outstanding contributions to the 2014 Featured List Petropavlovsk-class battleships, you are hereby awarded this Tireless Contributor barnstar. Congratulations! For the Military history Wikiproject Coordinators, TomStar81 ( Talk) 08:11, 29 January 2015 (UTC) |
And I'd like to pull Parsecboy into this conversation as well.
I think this image is featureable, but I'm not quite sure about something. See all the white spots on the hull?
I'm pretty sure at least some of them might be natural, particularly the large white blob below the anchor holes, but I think some aren't. Any advice you can give me would be appreciated, because it's not a high-res enough of image to tell the difference between damage and photograph (on the William H. Seward FP, for instance, you could actually tell the difference between dandruff and damage.) Adam Cuerden ( talk) 10:24, 5 February 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, many thanks for your GA review of Ernest Melville Charles Guest. FunkyCanute ( talk) 15:25, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Greetings, User: Sturmvogel 66. Perhaps you could clear up an apparent discrepancy which appears at two Wikipedia pages, one you created and the other contributed heavily to. It concerns the range of the Siegfried-Granate shell used by the coastal defense versions of the 38 cm SK C/34 naval gun. One distance is given in the body of each article (with a cite), another in a table below it. Both pages (the preceding, and 38 cm Siegfried K (E) created by you on April 28, 2009), show similar content in each place.
Given the nearly 40% lower mass of the 495 kg Siegfried-Granate shell compared to the 800 kg standard SK C/34 shells, a mere 2,000 yard increase over the heavier shell's 42,000 yard range (as cited in the article body) seems a bit shy. On the other hand, an increase to 60,900 yards (listed, uncited, in the table) seems closer to the sort of gain that might be expected.
Which do you understand to be correct? Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 16:13, 19 February 2015 (UTC)
Thanks. Done. Nothing misread, just incomplete. All good now. Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 23:36, 20 February 2015 (UTC)
On 21 February 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Italian cruiser Vettor Pisani, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Italian cruiser Vettor Pisani almost bombarded Prevesa during the Italo-Turkish War of 1911–12 until protests by the Austro-Hungarian Empire forced the Italians to cancel the operation? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Italian cruiser Vettor Pisani. 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, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
I have addressed all your comments on the A-class review page.-- Tomandjerry211 ( talk) 22:23, 21 February 2015 (UTC)
That's it, the first round is done, sign-ups are closed and we're into round 2. 64 competitors made it into this round, and are now broken into eight groups of eight. The top two of each group will go through to round 3, and then the top scoring 16 "wildcards" across all groups. Round 1 saw some interesting work on some very important articles, with the round leader Freikorp ( submissions) owing most of his 622 points scored to a Featured Article on the 2001 film Final Fantasy: The Spirits Within which qualified for a times-two multiplier. This is a higher score than in previous years, as Godot13 ( submissions) had 500 points in 2014 at the end of round 1, and our very own judge, Sturmvogel_66 ( submissions) led round 1 with 601 points in 2013.
In addition to Freikorp's work, some other important articles and pictures were improved during round one, here's a snapshot of a few of them:
You may also wish to know that The Core Contest is running through the month of March. Head there for further details - they even have actual prizes!
If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—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. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · email), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · email) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · email)
Thanks for your assistance! Miyagawa ( talk) on behalf of Wikipedia:WikiCup.
( Opt-out Instructions) This message was send by Jim Carter through MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 04:55, 1 March 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sturm, Nate and Ed. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. Does the article need more work? Is there anything I left out of the summary you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 03:51, 2 March 2015 (UTC)
I changed it because on my screen it sets as follows:
That's just silly -- and very distracting for the reader. You cited WP:SHIPMOS, but a fast look there does not show this usage. Where specifically do you think it calls for this oddity? . . Jim - Jameslwoodward ( talk to me • contribs) 16:19, 3 March 2015 (UTC)
What does "travel lock" mean? Since me and Hchc2009 (he's conducting a GA Review) don't know, I thought you might help. Thanks, Tomandjerry211 ( talk) 13:17, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
On 9 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Italian cruiser Pisa, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Italian cruiser Pisa (pictured) was one of the ships that "completely destroyed" Derna, Libya during the Italo-Turkish War of 1911–12? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Italian cruiser Pisa. 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. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 13:21, 9 March 2015 (UTC)
On 10 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Italian cruiser San Giorgio, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that after the Italian cruiser San Giorgio was scuttled in shallow water in 1941, the British commissioned its wreck as an immobile repair ship? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Italian cruiser San Giorgio. 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. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 01:07, 10 March 2015 (UTC)
On 12 March 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Italian cruiser Carlo Alberto, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the Italian cruiser Carlo Alberto was used for radio experiments by Guglielmo Marconi while serving as a royal yacht for King Victor Emmanuel III? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Italian cruiser Carlo Alberto. 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. |
— Coffee // have a cup // beans // 12:02, 12 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturm. Went over to check on Andrei Pervozvanny-class battleship (it being the last non-list Russian BB), started putting in some of the refs I have on hand, was thinking over potentially putting it up at GAN soon so that we could close off the entire topic outside of sprucing up others ship for runs at FA. Besides the fact that Pervozvanny relies a lot on one source (Melnikov), are there any inherent issues with the article? Buggie111 ( talk) 12:45, 20 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't think they would be shooting at (or hitting) any targets in "heavy" weather. That's my point.-- EditorExtraordinaire ( talk) 00:10, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Tomandjerry211 ( talk) 21:29, 22 March 2015 (UTC)
Hello. I would like to ask why you thought that my edit to the page was not an improvement; as it stands now, it's not much clear what the author meant, and as I verified on the source book, the citation is not 100% proper.
Italianhistorian88 ( talk) 20:18, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
Unless you have some upcoming edits you'd like to suggest, I'd like to remove Nike Zeus from A-class review and re-submit it to FA. Maury Markowitz ( talk) 21:07, 23 March 2015 (UTC)
re: . If you had checked my edit summary, and then the article itself, you'd see the hull code was changed to CV(N) following her re-fit and added equip for night ops. Therefore, it's entirely appropriate that it be noted in the lead. (even though the hull code was changed, the article title et al. should remain CV as per wp:commonname.) - theWOLFchild 17:30, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Hey, let's not give up on this yet. In 20 seconds of looking, I found 2 sources mentioning Enterprise CV(N), for night ops; here and here. I know they're considered reliable sources, but it proves I'm not making it up on my own. I saw this mentioned on the History Channel series, Enterprise 360. I'm sure they didn't make it either. It's unfortunate one of the refs is dead (cv6.org), but it was a perfectly good source at the time. Just because that one source is now gone, doesn't mean it didn't happen.
If anything, I think it's incumbent upon us to find more sources to support this, rather than dismissing it completely. - theWOLFchild 21:44, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Actually, I just found the cached text-version of the CV6.org ref, here. - theWOLFchild 21:50, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
Just found another source, here. And while these are remarks on a board, they are supported by their own source, "The Big E: The Story of the USS Enterprise by Edward P. Stafford (New York: Random House, Inc., 1962).
Looking for more... - theWOLFchild 21:57, 26 March 2015 (UTC)
The Writer's Barnstar | ||
On behalf of the project coordinators, congratulations on placing second in the February 2015 MilHist article-writing contest, with 75 points from 9 articles! Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:43, 27 March 2015 (UTC) |
Ulysses S. Grant got promoted to FA today (and thank you for the review there, by the way). I wanted to claim it as a Wikicup contribution, but wanted to check with you first. I've done a lot of work on it this year, hundreds of edits, many of them substantive. But I also had co-contributors, and also did a lot of work in 2014. I think it's legit, and if it were a DYK I'd just put it on my contributions page and see what happens, but with hundreds of points at stake, I wanted to make sure it's on the level first. Thanks, Coemgenus ( talk) 14:37, 31 March 2015 (UTC)
Just out of curiosity, is there a difference between and and are there periods to their use in Japanese naval articles. I mention it because on the Nisshin article, it is the former and before I go changing it to the ensign, I wanted to make sure I wasn't messing with something I didn't know about. Thanks for your time, Llammakey ( talk) 22:24, 7 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello Wikipedia Library Users,
You are receiving this message because the Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to HighBeam. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services the Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thank you. Sent by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) at 16:45, 13 April 2015 (UTC)
Dear User: Sturmvogel 66. All that edit did was make the table internally consistent (KM/MI). Why the revert? Yours, Wikiuser100 ( talk) 17:06, 25 April 2015 (UTC)
Hello!
You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thanks!
Delivered by
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 12:11, 28 April 2015 (UTC)
We are preparing to take a closer look at Featured articles promoted in 2004–2010 that may need a review. We started with a script-compiled list of older FAs that have not had a recent formal review. The next step is to prune the list by removing articles that are still actively maintained, up-to-date, and believed to meet current standards. We know that many of you personally maintain articles that you nominated, so we'd appreciate your help in winnowing the list where appropriate.
Please take a look at the sandbox list, check over the FAs listed by your name, and indicate on the sandbox talk page your assessment of their current status. Likewise, if you have taken on the maintenance of any listed FAs that were originally nominated by a departed editor, please indicate their status. BLPs should be given especially careful consideration.
Thanks for your help! SandyGeorgia ( Talk) 19:41, 30 April 2015 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
For completing 21 reviews during January-March 2015, on behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Cheers, Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 09:06, 6 May 2015 (UTC) |
Hi.
I saw your edit, and I am perplexed; why put the info I had in the "Design/modification" section, which details the technical aspects, and not in the "Service" section, which is about the broader terms of service of these ships and considerations about their role, which in my opinion concerns the aspects I've put forward? The point of my edit was to evidence a position held by some naval historians about the broad decision to modernize these ships, not a critic on the technical aspects.
Thanks in advance.
Italianhistorian88 ( talk) 11:55, 6 May 2015 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you your first A-Class Medal with Diamonds for your fine work on Fuji-class battleship, HMS Nairana (1917), and HMS Collingwood (1908). What a dedication and achievement! MisterBee1966 ( talk) 16:16, 7 May 2015 (UTC) |
Would you close this A-class review for me, since this was my nom and I am not a coordinator. Thanks, Tomandjerry211 ( Let's have a chat) 21:12, 7 May 2015 (UTC)
Hello!
You are receiving this message because The Wikipedia Library has record of you receiving a one-year subscription to Questia. This is a brief update to remind you about that access:
Finally, we would greatly appreciate if you filled out this short survey. The survey helps us not only better serve you with facilitating this particular partnership, but also helps us discover what other partnerships and services The Wikipedia Library can offer.
Thanks! Delivered by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk), on behalf of National Names 2000 10:41, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I agree the vision statement for 7th Signal Command (United States) reads like an ad. They usually do... On the other hand, it's authoritative. It's their commanders chosen words for what the commands stretch goals are. Perhaps some context should help? Rbcwa ( talk) 23:21, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, I found this while searching for other things. Hopefully it will help a bit when you get to HMS Formidable (1898). Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturm. A summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. I had to squeeze the summary down to around 1200 characters; was there anything I left out you'd like to see put back in? - Dank ( push to talk) 02:50, 23 May 2015 (UTC)
Hi, Sturmvogel 66:
I expected you to revert the edit...not so quickly, but I expected it.
Please consider my reasons for the edit. If you still disagree, then I'll ask Magioladitis to arbitrate.
1. Your invalid ISBN causes a Checkwiki error #72: "ISBN-10 with wrong checksum", which appears in a listing. Different people from Checkwiki will constantly need to handle this error.
2. If we allow this invalid ISBN, then everyone else will want their invalid ISBN.
3. Wikipedia:ISBN#Types clearly states (in bold font even):
Please use the 13-digit...Use 13-digit ISBNs, if available, as these are now standard as of January 1, 2007
4. The comment in your article stated "<!--ISBN leads to the book on Worldcat-->". I've shown you the correct way to get to the same WorldCat page using the "oclc" template.
5. Seriously, only history-related people revert my edits that fix an invalid ISBN-10 with a valid ISBN-13.
I understand your desire to preserve history, but...is the purpose of the ISBN in the citation to exactly duplicate the publication, or is the purpose to generate a valid "Book sources" page so readers can locate a copy of the publication? I think the latter. Knife-in-the-drawer ( talk) 02:31, 25 May 2015 (UTC)
The name change discussion was getting to be quite confusing as to who supported what, so I revamped the format and I'm asking all editors who already voted to return and recast their votes under the new format. [5] Thanks, BMK ( talk) 12:12, 6 June 2015 (UTC)
Ian and Sturm, this FA that you guys nommed will hit the Main Page soon. I didn't change much for the TFA column. - Dank ( push to talk) 01:50, 7 June 2015 (UTC)
Looks good today, precious again! - + GA likes GA ;) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:26, 21 June 2015 (UTC)
Welcome to the GA Cup! In less than 72 hours, the competition will begin! Before you all start reviewing nominations and reassessments we want to make sure you understand the following:
Also, rather than creating a long list on what to remember, make sure you have read the "Scoring", "Submissions", and "FAQ" pages. Now some of you are probably wondering how on earth the rounds will work. The rounds will work in a similar fashion as the previous competition, with the exception of the first round. Round 1 will have everyone compete in one big pool. Depending on the final number of participants after sign-ups close, a to-be-determined number of participants will move on (highest scorers will move on) to Round 2. We guarantee that the top 15 will move on (this number may change), so make sure you aim for those top positions! Moving on to Round 2, participants will be split into pools. The pools will be determined by a computer program that places participants by random. More details regarding Round 2 will be sent out at the end of Round 1. It is important to note that the GA Cup will run on UTC time, so make sure you know what time that is for where you live! On that note, the GA Cup will start on July 1 at 0:00:01 UTC; Round 1 will end on July 29 at 23:59:59 UTC; Round 2 will commence on August 1 at 0:00:01 UTC. All reviews must be started after or on the start time of the round. If you qualify for Round 2 but do not complete a review before the end of Round 1, the review can be carried over to Round 2; however that review will not count for Round 1. Prior to the start of the the second round, participants who qualify to move on will be notified. Finally, if you know anyone else that might be interesting in participating, let them know! Sign-ups close on July 15 so there is still plenty of time to join in on the action! If you have any further questions, contact one of the judges or leave a message here. After sign-ups close, check the Pools page as we will post the exact number of participants that will move on to the next round. Because this number will be determined past the halfway mark of Round 1, we encourage you to aim to be in the top 15 as the top 15 at the end of the round are guaranteed to move on. Cheers from 3family6, Dom497, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, 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) 13:00, 28 June 2015 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel 66,
I noticed that you'd been involved in the
Europeana Challenge a few years ago and thought you'd be interested in a new related project...
I've recently uploaded ~800 files from the crowdsourced
http://www.europeana1914-1918.eu collection and was wondering if you'd be interested in using some of them (and helping to categorise them). You can see the complete project here:
Commons:Europeana/Europeana 1914-1918 batch upload.
Because of the way I had to do this upload, these files are hand-selected to have a high likelihood of being usable in Wikipedia articles. It's not just a massive dump of pictures, rather, it is items from Europeana 14-18 project that are BOTH freely licensed AND "encyclopedic". Also, because these are crowdsourced items, many of them tell a much more personal kind of story to the things we see from war-museums (for example, i've been able to insert files myself into non Mil-Hist specific articles such as
pegleg,
Ocular prosthesis,
muslin,
button,
travel document, etc). You can see on that project page that I've divided them into language groups - this is based on the language of the description (and therefore the object's owner), not based the originating country of the object - often items relating to France items will be in the "German" [language] section, and vice versa.
If you're interested in this material, I would very much appreciate if you could have a look at some of the items and perhaps use them in WP articles directly, or help me check their categories and indicate 'suggested articles' next to the images on the project page. Sincerely,
Witty
lama 15:26, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
As someone who does a lot of military research on Wikipedia how do you handle an obvious error in the source data that keeps getting reverted by people who don't understand the problem?
The items are these two pages: Nakajima_Ki-84 Nakajima_Ki-43
The table title from the USSB #17 figure 17 page 72 says production is by quarter but lists Jan, Feb, Mar, Apr.
There is no way the factory only operated for 4 months a year throughout the war and the typesetters put the first four months not the quarters.
It has been corrected and reverted twice. Ryan.opel ( talk) 02:54, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
Just a reminder that Template:Did you know nominations/New Tavern Fort is still outstanding - grateful if you could complete the review. Prioryman ( talk) 11:37, 3 July 2015 (UTC)
To avoid starting a revert war: RETAIN is irrelevant in this case, since it applies only to English varieties (i.e. whether an article is written according to British/Australian/US/Canadian etc. English-language spelling and grammatical conventions); it doesn't apply to the order of units, which is specified by WP:MOSNUM. In this case, any article which does not have strong national ties to the UK or USA is expected to use the SI-first unit presentation style consistently. The article in question was not previously consistent in its style, which my edit attempted to fix. The fact that other editors had previously left the article in a MOS-disapproved style (for an article about Russia) is not a good reason for leaving it so. Archon 2488 ( talk) 20:53, 4 July 2015 (UTC)
We hope The Wikipedia Library has been a useful resource for your work. TWL is expanding rapidly and we need your help!
With only a couple hours per week, you can make a big difference for sharing knowledge. Please sign up and help us in one of these ways:
Send on behalf of
The Wikipedia Library using
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 04:31, 7 July 2015 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
For completing 21 reviews during April–June 2015, on behalf of the Wikiproject Military History coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons. Thanks/cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 09:52, 8 July 2015 (UTC) |
In case you missed my ping: Some tweaking done to article, plus comments on Talk:Russian battleship Potemkin. • Lingzhi♦ (talk) 10:27, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturmvogel! I am afraid I have become ensnared with User EyeTruth again. I mentioned your name as a character witness at the Adminstartor's Edit Warring page. Just an FYI. Thanks. Gunbirddriver ( talk) 03:48, 13 July 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for the speedy and efficient review! FunkyCanute ( talk) 17:37, 15 July 2015 (UTC)
You insist on a link that says Hotchkiss pointing to a Vickers gun ? When the Vickers gun only appeared years after the ships were built ? And notes explaining what pdr means do not belong in infoboxes. Rcbutcher ( talk) 02:01, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 14:45, 17 July 2015 (UTC) Thanks, Gerda.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 14:50, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
On 20 July 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article French submarine Mariotte, which you recently created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the French submarine Mariotte was nicknamed the "toothbrush" on account of her unusual hull configuration? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/French submarine Mariotte. 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. |
Gatoclass ( talk) 12:51, 20 July 2015 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel 66,
May I gather your attention on the topic of the Ki-84?
I find the production numbers which are given in the table somewhat shady. I've left a comment on its talk page, may you join the conversation? Thank you.
Regards Bouquey ( talk) 20:31, 21 July 2015 (UTC)
Frank Tarr, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. I found instances of close paraphrasing.-- 3family6 ( Talk to me | See what I have done) 22:46, 25 July 2015 (UTC)
Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. The Rambling Man, who was eliminated during the first round in our last competition, earned an impressive 513 points, reviewed twice as many articles (26) as any other competitor. It was a tight race for second for first-time competitors BenLinus1214 and Tomandjerry211, who finished second and third with 243 and 224 points, respectively. Close behind was Wugapodes, who earned 205 points. The change in our points system had an impact on scoring. It was easier to earn higher points, although the key to success didn't change from last time, which was choosing articles with older nomination dates. For example, most of the articles The Rambling Man reviewed were worth 18 points in the nomination date category, and he benefited from it. BenLinus1214 reviewed the longest article, A Simple Plan (at 26,536 characters, or 4,477 words), the 1994 film starring Bill Paxton, Billy Bob Thornton, and Bridget Fonda and directed by Sam Raimi, and earned all possible 5 points in that category. After feedback from our participants, the judges slightly changed the rule about review length this time out. Shorter reviews are now allowed, as long as reviewers give nominators an opportunity to address their feedback. Shorter reviews are subject to the judges' discretion; the judges will continue their diligence as we continue the competition. Despite having fewer contestants at the beginning of Round 1 than last time, 132 articles were reviewed, far more than the 117 articles that were reviewed in Round 1 of the inaugural GA Cup. All of us involved should be very proud of what we've accomplished thus far. The judges are certain that Round 2 will be just as successful. 16 contestants have moved onto Round 2 and have been randomly placed in 4 groups of 4, with the top 2 in each pool progressing to Round 3, as well as the top participant ("9th place") of all remaining competitors. Round 2 has already begun and will end on August 29 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here. Good luck and remember to have fun! Cheers from Dom497, Figureskatingfan, 3family6 and Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, 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) 03:52, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
-- Dom497 ( talk) 13:50, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I'm done with the tables, so it's ready whenever you get the time to do the prose. Parsecboy ( talk) 15:22, 10 August 2015 (UTC)
This was not a very helpful edit. Sourced information on the armament are a must. And I´m positive the "Gröner" book wont be enough. Alexpl ( talk) 15:20, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
I wish I could expand stubs as fast as you! ~ ONUnicorn( Talk| Contribs) problem solving 20:21, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel 66,
May I gather your attention on the topic of the Ki-43?
Since the airframe production values share the same ref. as for Ki-84, it should be rectified and clarified. I find the accuracy of the quarterly (period) questionable and not very representative. What you think about it?
If you don't mind, I'm going to change it. Regards Bouquey ( talk) 22:26, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Keilana ( talk) 09:13, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
Table in Friedman can not be taken seriously in - everything is messed up.-- Inctructor ( talk) 20:27, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
why are you being such an arse? Look I know I don't own the article, but I at least have the right to edit what I have written and make it satisfactory in my eyes. Please do not revert my edits again without discussing it with me first. I am not going to edit war over this. i shall undo you=r revert one final time. -- Petebutt ( talk) 19:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
The finals for the 2015 Wikicup has now begun! Congrats to the 8 contestants who have survived to the finals, and well done and thanks to everyone who took part in rounds 3 and 4.
In round 3, we had a three-way tie for qualification among the wildcard contestants, so we had 34 competitors. The leader was by far Casliber ( submissions) in Group B, who earned 1496 points. Although 913 of these points were bonus points, he submitted 15 articles in the DYK category. Second place overall was Coemgenus ( submissions) at 864 points, who although submitted just 2 FAs for 400 points, earned double that amount for those articles in bonus points. Everyone who moved forward to Round 4 earned at least 100 points.
The scores required to move onto the semifinals were impressive; the lowest scorer to move onto the finals was 407, making this year's Wikicup as competitive as it's always been. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:
The intense competition between RO and Calvin999 will continue into the finals. They're both eligible for the Newcomers Trophy, given for the first time in the Wikicup; whoever makes the most points will win it.
Good luck to the finalists; the judges are sure that the competition will be fierce!
Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs) 11:48, 2 September 2015 (UTC)
The article Russian monitor Novgorod you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Russian monitor Novgorod 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) 06:41, 3 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings, all! We hope that everyone had a nice summer. Saturday saw the end of Round 2. Things went relatively smoothly this month. The top 2 from 4 pools, plus the top participant (the wildcard, or "9th place") of all remaining competitors, moved onto Round 3. We had one withdrawal early in Round 2, so he was replaced by the next-highest scorer from Round 1. Round 2's highest scorer was Pool D's Tomandjerry211, who earned an impressive 366 points; he also reviewed the most articles (19). Close behind was Zwerg Nase, also in Pool D, at 297 points and 16 articles. The wildcard slot went to Good888. Congrats to all! Round 3 will have 9 competitors in 3 pools. The key to moving forward was reviewing articles with the longest nomination dates, as it has been in every round up to now. For example, 2 competitors only needed to review 2 articles each to win in their pools, and each article were either from the pink nomination box (20 points) or had languished in the queue for over 5 months (18 points). The GA Cup continues to be a success in many ways, even with fewer competitors this time. For some reason, the competitors in the 2015 GA Cup have reviewed fewer articles in Round 2, which has made the judges scratch their head in confusion. We've speculated many reasons for that: the summer months and vacations, our competitors are saving their strength for the final rounds, or they all live in the Pacific Northwest and the heavy wildfire smoke has affected their thinking. Whatever the reason, Round 2 competitors reviewed almost 100 articles, which is a significant impact in the task of reviewing articles for GA status. We've considered that the lower participation this competition is due to timing, so we intend to discuss the best time frame for future GA Cups. For Round 3, participants have been placed randomly in 3 pools of 3 contestants each; the top editor in each pool will progress, as well as the top 2 of all remaining users. Round 3 will start on September 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on September 28 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 3 and the pools can be found here. Good luck to the remaining contestants, and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6 and Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
Delivered on behalf of WikiProject Good articles by MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 15:26, 7 September 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Sturmvogel 66. Russian monitor Novgorod, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 14:55, 14 September 2015 (UTC) |
The ship is obvious and redundant. Article was fine without it. Would you write The airplane Boeing 747, The car Jaguar? Sca ( talk)
PS: in what sense are you a Sturmvogel? Sca ( talk) 16:18, 18 September 2015 (UTC)
I came across an article about third-rate sailing ships that has had a request for improvement of citations at the top since February 2013. Since you are interested in military history, I thought you might like to work on it. Corinne ( talk) 01:15, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
In response to a request for a copy-edit at WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests, I've been copy-editing the article on the Anglo-French War (1778–83). So far, I haven't seen any major problems, but I do have a few questions. I wonder if you are too busy right now to answer the few questions I already have and any more that I may have as I go through the article. If you are too busy, can you suggest another editor who might be able to help? Corinne ( talk) 02:24, 19 September 2015 (UTC)
Hey, Sturm, a summary of a Featured Article you nominated at WP:FAC will appear on the Main Page soon. It mostly follows the lead section; how does it look? - Dank ( push to talk) 20:10, 21 September 2015 (UTC)
@ Parsecboy and Climie.ca: So I've discovered Siemens scandal, which is surprisingly not a hoax (eg [6] [7]). Should a mention of it be added to Kongo-class battlecruisers and Japanese battlecruiser Kongo? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:33, 22 September 2015 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 29 September. Yours, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:21, 25 September 2015 (UTC)
In recognition of your successful election as the Lead Co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, I hereby present you with the Lead Coordinator's stars. I wish you luck in the coming year. TomStar81 ( Talk) 00:47, 30 September 2015 (UTC)
The WikiProject Barnstar | ||
In gratitude for your coordination services to the Military history WikiProject, from September 2014 to September 2015, please accept this WikiProject Barnstar. TomStar81 ( Talk) 01:39, 30 September 2015 (UTC) |
I've just been looking at the HMS Argus entry after the "aerial photos heard 'round the world'" of the new possible Chinese aircraft carrier hull at Dalian. One of the thoughts in the Chinese aircraft carrier programme article is what might be the best way to train first captains of these first vessels (naval helicopter pilots or fast jet pilots). But my instant thought was how were the captains of Argus, Hermes, Langley, Eagle etc picked, plus Hosho. Do you have any info on how the captain of Argus was selected? Are there any pattern in how the captain-selection process worked? Buckshot06 (talk) 08:52, 1 October 2015 (UTC)
GA Cup competitors and observers: Happy Fall! Get ready, we're about to move into the finals of the second-ever GA Cup! Monday saw the end of Round 3. Out of the 8 contestants in the semi-finals, 5 have moved to the finals. The semi-finals were competitive. Our semi-finalists reviewed a total of 61 articles, or a grand total of 1,151 points. If you were to lump the top winners from each of the three pools together, it'd be a close horse race; they were within 35 points of each other, which can only mean that the finals will be an exciting race. Tomandjerry211, our top scorer in Round 2, again earned the most points in the semi-finals, with 288 points and 16 articles reviewed. Johanna came in second overall, with 251 points and 13 articles reviewed; Sturmvogel 66 came in third overall, with 221 points and 16 articles. Rounding out our wildcard slots are Zwerg Nase and The Rambling Man. These contestants were very strategic in how they reviewed articles. Like every other round in the history of the GA Cup, success depended upon reviewing oldest-nominated articles. For example, Johanna reviewed 5 articles that were worth the highest possible points. Congrats to all our finalists, and good luck! Stay tuned to this space for more information about the 2nd GA Cup, including overall statistics and how this competition has affected Wikipedia. We regret to inform you that Dom497, one of our original judges and co-creator of the GA Cup, has stepped down as a judge. Dom, a longtime member of WP:WikiProject Good articles, is responsible for the look of the GA Cup and has been instrumental in its upkeep. We wish him the best as he starts his university education, and are certain that he'll make an impact there as he has in Wikipedia. The finals started on October 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and will end on Ocober 29 at 23:59:59 UTC with a winner being crowned. Information about the Final can be found here. Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6 and Jaguar, and MrWooHoo. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, you will be on the mailing list no matter what as this is the easiest way to communicate between all participants.
|
Thank you for reviewing, and presumably passing Vegetable, at GAN. Should not the review page be archived? Cwmhiraeth ( talk) 05:29, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
On 3 October 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Russian monitor Novgorod, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Novgorod's unusual design (top deck layout pictured) gave the warship a reputation as one of the worst ever constructed? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Russian monitor Novgorod. 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. |
— Chris Woodrich ( talk) 06:10, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
Wow, that was a quick assessment of "bad copyedits". It seems you actually like bad grammar, bad syntax, missing punctuation and redirects up the wazoo in Wikipedia articles. That revert is a reflection on your lack of writing skills; now deal with it. — Quicksilver T @ 14:59, 3 October 2015 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you the WikiChevrons for an awesome 34 FA, A-Class, Peer and GA reviews during the period July to September 2015. Well done! Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 10:26, 5 October 2015 (UTC) |
Hello Sturmvogel 66. Your edit summary for this edit indicates a reversion of "Vandalism". I was wondering: is it not possible that the IP editor's change was made in good faith, based upon the (mistaken) assumption that "ship struck" means "struck by a bomb"? By definition, any good-faith effort to improve the encyclopedia is not considered to be vandalism ( WP:Vandalism). Perhaps an edit summary explaining the meaning of "ship struck" could have been used when reverting? Just a thought – thanks. – Wdchk ( talk) 21:08, 7 October 2015 (UTC)
Greetings. I am curious whether the Battle of Aleppo (2012–present) article is eligible for GA status since the battle is ongoing.-- Catlemur ( talk) 08:36, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for uploading File:MiG-3vu.jpg. I noticed that this file is being used under a claim of fair use. However, I think that the way it is being used fails the first non-free content criterion. This criterion states that files used under claims of fair use may have no free equivalent; in other words, if the file could be adequately covered by a freely-licensed file or by text alone, then it may not be used on Wikipedia. If you believe this file is not replaceable, please:
{{di-replaceable fair use disputed|<your reason>}}
below the original replaceable fair use template, replacing <your reason>
with a short explanation of why the file is not replaceable.Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media item by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by creating new media yourself (for example, by taking your own photograph of the subject).
If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these media fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on this link. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per the non-free content policy. If you have any questions, please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Stefan2 ( talk) 20:59, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi there, looks like you made this edit. There is a mismatch between visible name of gun (QF 12 pounder 18 cwt) and actual link (QF 12 pounder 12 cwt). Which is correct ? Also : 12-pounder seems a pretty puny armament for a cruiser : didn't she ever get the 4-inch upgrade ? I dimly remember making an edit about this a long time ago but can't remember the circumstances. regards, Rod Rcbutcher ( talk) 21:36, 10 October 2015 (UTC)
Hey Sturmvogel 66. Great to meet you this weekend! If you are interested in the Visiting Scholar positions, we would recommend applying through these instructions. @ Ryan (Wiki Ed): will make sure to match you with one of the universities that makes the most sense and/or try to find one that can support your MilHist/Ships interests (maybe the Naval Academy can support something like this?). Astinson (WMF) ( talk) 15:48, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for joining GLAM Pritzker! If you need the Pritzker Librarians to check print citations for you, please email us at librarian@pritzkermilitary.org or leave a message on my talk page. Fair winds and following seas! TeriEmbrey ( talk) 21:01, 13 October 2015 (UTC)
Since you assessed Zatevakhin as C class for not meeting coverage and accuracy, what can I do to improve it? Kges1901 ( talk) 21:06, 19 October 2015 (UTC)
Hello, Sturmvogel 66. French destroyer Jaguar, an article you either created or significantly contributed to, has been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . You can see the hook and the discussion here. You are welcome to participate! Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 00:23, 22 October 2015 (UTC) |
Just wanted to say thanks for the link to HMS Renown (1916). That was actually helpful. Pennsy22 ( talk) 05:26, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
My Rv of your paragraph was totally unintentional, and I didn't know I had made it until receiving a not that you had reverted me.. The Big Thumb Syndrome strikes again, as I scrolled down through watchlist. sorry. cheers. Moriori ( talk) 19:07, 25 October 2015 (UTC)
You're really giving me a run for my money there, aren't you? ;) Just wanted to let you know that there is a little mistake on your submissions' page: The Zahamena National Park review needs to be GA2, not GA1. Cheers! Zwerg Nase ( talk) 10:38, 27 October 2015 (UTC)
An added comma woulda worked, but your approach does, too. Anmccaff ( talk) 20:12, 29 October 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I just wanted to thank you for taking the time to review St George's Academy at GAN—it's greatly appreciated. All the best, — Noswall59 ( talk) 13:22, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
2015 Stub Contest - First Prize | |
A big high-five for Sturmvogel 66 for putting on the Hard Hat and build-build-building on 607 stubs. Well done! Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 13:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC) |
Hi Sturmvogel 66 congratulations on winning the stub contest. Could you please email me at karla.marte@wikimedia.org.uk to send the prize your way. Thank you. Karla Marte(WMUK) —Preceding undated comment added 13:03, 2 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your help. I did not mean for it to come across that way. Don Brunett ( talk) 22:14, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Don Brunett
Three winning tickets! | |
Congratulations to Sturmvogel 66 for winning an additional 75 quid for three winning tickets in the stub lucky dip! Cas Liber ( talk · contribs) 23:20, 30 October 2015 (UTC) |
Awesome! Now, what to get...-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 23:29, 30 October 2015 (UTC)
Sturm, Brian just scheduled this one, I'll get to it later tonight. Happy Halloween! - Dank ( push to talk) 00:06, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū that attacked Pearl Harbor!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 07:02, 16 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, the Wikicup table didn't update at 00:13 GMT like it usually does. Last time was at 20:13 GMT. — Calvin999 00:42, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
Per this thread, does this make sense to you ( [8])? That submission was 5x expanded and a GA, but Miyagawa says that because I listed GA as a reason at DYK the entry is ineligible for Wikicup points even though it was also expanded five times. The version I nomed had 1,012 words ( [9]), and the version when I started to expand it had 177 words ( [10]). So this was both a 5x expansion and a GA, but Miyagawa says my "intention" was GA, so it doesn't count. RO (talk) 20:31, 1 November 2015 (UTC)
The second-ever GA Cup is now over! The competition officially ended Thursday. Congrats to everyone who participated, and especially to our finalists. The winner of the 2nd GA Cup is Zwerg Nase! He earned 408 points, over 100 points more than he earned in all previous rounds. He tied with our second-place winner, Sturmvogel 66 with 367 points, in number of articles reviewed (24), and they earned almost the same points for reviewing articles that were in the queue the longest (Zwerg with 322, Sturmvogel with 326). Basically, they tied in points, but what made the different for Zwerg was the advantage he had in reviewing longer articles. It seems that the rule change of earning more realistic points for longer articles made a difference. All of our contestants should be proud of the work they were able to accomplish through the GA Cup. Congrats to these worthy opponents! Our third and fourth place winners, Johanna and Tomandjerry211, also ran a close race, with 167 points and 147 points respectfully. We had one withdrawal; we found it interesting that competitors dropped out in Round 2 and 3 as well. One of the original judges and co-creator of this competition, User:Dom497 stepped down as judge during Round 3; as stated previously, we will miss his input and wish him the best. The judges were pleased with our results, even though fewer users competed this time compared to our inaugural competition. We recognize that this might be due to holding the competition during the summer months. We intend on looking more closely when we should conduct this contest, as well as other aspects of the GA Cup. We've set up a feedback page for everyone's input about how we should conduct the contest and what rule changes should be made. If you have any ideas about how we can improve things, please visit it and give us your input. Again, thanks to all and congratulations to our winners! Please stay tuned for the start of GA Cup #3. Cheers from 3family6, Figureskatingfan, Jaguar and MrWooHoo. |
The Good Article Barnstar | ||
The judges of the 2nd Annual GA Cup would like to congratulate you for making 2nd Place in the GA Cup! Thank you so much for participating and we'd like to reward this barnstar for your great enthusiasm in reducing the GAN backlog. We hope to see you next year! MrWooHoo ( talk) 00:28, 2 November 2015 (UTC) |
Think you can find me a good picture of him? I did a lot of work on that article. He was a great man. Don Brunett ( talk) 21:39, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Don Brunett
Hi,
Your renaming of the page caused a double redirect. It would be nice of you to fix the links to the page.
There is also a fact that now none of the pages are standardized. The Type 59 and Type 69 have no tank suffix. The type 80 is the only one with the main battle tank suffix. And lastly the Type 96 and 99 have tank suffixed.
Warm regards RedArrowSG ( talk) 01:10, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi, I have been working on the Gordon Gollob article for some time now. I am struggling with his higher command role. I was wondering if you had access to some more information on this phase of his life. Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 07:19, 7 November 2015 (UTC)
WikiCup 2015 is now in the books! Congrats to our finalists and winners, and to everyone who took part in this year's competition.
This year's results were an exact replica of last year's competition. For the second year in a row, the 2015 WikiCup champion is Godot13 ( submissions) ( FP bonus points). All of his points were earned for an impressive 253 featured pictures and their associated bonus points (5060 and 1695, respectively). His entries constituted scans of currency from all over the world and scans of medallions awarded to participants of the U.S. Space program. Cwmhiraeth ( submissions) came in second place; she earned by far the most bonus points (4082), for 4 featured articles, 15 good articles, and 147 DYKs, mostly about in her field of expertise, natural science. Cas Liber ( submissions), a finalist every year since 2010, came in third, with 2379 points.
Our newcomer award, presented to the best-performing new competitor in the WikiCup, goes to Rationalobserver ( submissions). Everyone should be very proud of the work they accomplished. We will announce our other award winners soon.
A full list of our award winners are:
We warmly invite all of you to sign up for next year's competition. Discussions and polls concerning potential rules changes are also open, and all are welcome to participate. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2016 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send.
Figureskatingfan ( talk · contribs · logs), Miyagawa ( talk · contribs · logs) and Sturmvogel 66 ( talk · contribs · logs) 18:39, 8 November 2015 (UTC)
On 9 November 2015, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article French destroyer Jaguar, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the French destroyer Jaguar was unique among the Chacal-class destroyers in being fitted to serve as a flagship and she was fitted to accommodate the admiral and his staff? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/French destroyer Jaguar. 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, 9 November 2015 (UTC)
Thanks for your thorough GA review on the Taylor–Burton Diamond. I did not watch the page, so was unaware, but I've made the suggested changes you suggested. Gareth E Kegg ( talk) 11:20, 12 November 2015 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
I noticed your contributions to Wikipedia Asian Month and thought you deserve some recognition; keep it up! ミーラー強斗武 ( StG88ぬ会話) 17:13, 16 November 2015 (UTC) |
Hello, Sturmvogel 66. The following articles that you've either created or significantly contributed to: have been nominated to appear on Wikipedia's Main Page as part of Did you know . Thank you. APersonBot ( talk!) 02:54, 17 November 2015 (UTC) |
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 03:26, 18 November 2015 (UTC)
If you have a moment, could you do a source review? Many thanks,-- Wehwalt ( talk) 22:50, 21 November 2015 (UTC)
Hi,
You appear to be eligible to vote in the current
Arbitration Committee election. The
Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia
arbitration process. It has the authority to enact binding solutions for disputes between editors, primarily related to serious behavioural issues that the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the ability to impose
site bans,
topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The
arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate, you are welcome to
review the candidates' statements and submit your choices on
the voting page. For the Election committee,
MediaWiki message delivery (
talk) 13:39, 24 November 2015 (UTC)
Sturmvogel 66, you opened this GA review a month ago, but haven't been back yet to start the review. If you aren't planning to review it after all, let me know and I'll make sure it gets back into the reviewing pool with its seniority intact; otherwise, I'll look forward to seeing the review commence in the next few days. Thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 02:13, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
...completely different! ;) Hey Strum, I suspect this is a little outside of your wheelhouse, but would you mind taking a look at my latest FAC? It failed last time, only because no one reviewed it. I'd really like for it to fail again for the same reason, so I'm canvassing (not really) my buddies here to help out. I'd appreciate it. Don't know if you celebrate Thanksgiving, but if so, I hope yours was as nice as mine. If not, best to you anyway. Christine (Figureskatingfan) ( talk) 17:03, 27 November 2015 (UTC)
Military history service award | ||
I hereby award you this as a token of the project’s appreciation for your contributions during the October 2015 Military history project backlog drive. AustralianRupert ( talk) 11:48, 1 December 2015 (UTC) |
On behalf of the Military history WikiProject's Coordinators, we would like to extend an invitation to nominate deserving editors for the 2015 Military historian of the year and Military history newcomer of the year awards. The nomination period will run from 7 December to 23:59 13 December, with the election phase running from 14 December to 23:59 21 December. MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 05:06, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds | ||
On behalf of the coordinators of the Military History Wikiproject, I am pleased to award you the A-Class Medal with Diamonds for your fine work on Russian battleship Oslyabya, Shōkaku-class aircraft carrier, and Peresvet-class battleship. Well done! Peacemaker67 ( crack... thump) 06:58, 10 December 2015 (UTC) |
|== Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 29, 2015 ==
Hi Sturm, I'll get to this one today. - Dank ( push to talk) 17:57, 14 December 2015 (UTC)
Precious again, your "world's first iron-hulled, armoured warship" with an uneventful career, now a museum ship!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:31, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
The Asian Month Barnstar | |
Thanks for your great contribution in Wikipedia Asian Month 2015! -- AddisWang ( talk) 19:50, 17 December 2015 (UTC) |
Iwane Matsui, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for a community good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.
To You and Yours!
FWiW Bzuk ( talk) 15:02, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
To a peaceful New Year… | |
A more personalized image given your interests... -- Godot13 ( talk) 21:21, 19 December 2015 (UTC) |
I like it! And happy holidays to you and yours.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 21:39, 19 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello Sturmvogel 66: Enjoy the holiday season and upcoming winter solstice, and thanks for your work to maintain, improve and expand Wikipedia. Cheers, North America 1000 20:23, 20 December 2015 (UTC)
Hello everyone, and we would like to wish you all a happy holiday season. As you will probably already know, the 2016 WikiCup begins in the new year; there is still time to sign up. There are some changes we'd like to announce before the competition begins.
After two years of serving as WikiCup judge, User:Miyagawa has stepped down as judge. He deserves great thanks and recognition for his dedication and hard work, and for providing necessary transition for a new group of judges in last year's Cup. Joining Christine ( User:Figureskatingfan) and Jason ( User:Sturmvogel 66) is Andrew ( User:Godot13), a very successful WikiCup competitor and expert in Featured Pictures; he won the two previous competitions. This is a strong judging team, and we anticipate lots of enjoyment and good work coming from our 2016 competitors.
We would also like to announce one change in how this year's WikiCup will be run. In the spirit of sportsmanship, Godot13 and Cwmhiraeth have chosen to limit their participation. See here for the announcement and a complete explanation of why. They and the judges feel that it will make for a more exciting, enjoyable, and productive competition.
The discussions/polls concerning the next competition's rules will be closed soon, and rules changes will be made clear on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring and talk pages. The judges are committed to not repeating the confusion that occurred last year and to ensuring that the new rules are both fair and in the best interests of the competition, which is, first and foremost, about improving Wikipedia.
If you have any questions or concerns, the judges can be reached on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, on their talk pages, or by email. We hope you will all join us in trying to make the 2015 WikiCup the most productive and enjoyable yet. You are receiving this message because you are listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 ( talk), Figureskatingfan ( talk), and Godot13 ( talk).-- MediaWiki message delivery ( talk) 06:47, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
Your edits have been mentioned here, if you care to respond. Thanks. - BilCat ( talk) 07:35, 22 December 2015 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 05:06, 24 December 2015 (UTC)
Nice to see this up as TFA today. I seem to recall some very pleasant copyediting of this a couple of years ago. It's looking good. Thank you. -- John ( talk) 17:14, 29 December 2015 (UTC)
You rated Mikhail Tikhonov as C class for not having any family data. After multiple boolean searches with "Михаил Фёдорович Тихонов" and Russian words for family, children, son, etc., I failed to come up with anything. If a Red Army officer had a family, it can usually be easily found. For example, Kuzma Grebennik had a son who was mentioned in another general's memoir and that son also gave an interview to a Ukrainian news site. The existence of Nikolay Voronov's marriages and descendants was proven by his wife and son being mentioned in the recollections of others. All of this means that there is the possibility that Tikhonov remained a bachelor throughout his life, and the only data about his ancestors that can be found is his social background. Kges1901 ( talk) 11:13, 2 January 2016 (UTC)
Note: can you archive this page? It just reached "425 sections" milestone. 333 -blue 23:13, 4 January 2016 (UTC)
The article has vastly excessive cross-references, this is a little known plane and so anyone who is interested in reading this page would have at least a moderate level of familiarity with such basic concepts as squadron, aircraft carriers, carrier, prototype, fuselage, cockpit, rounds, wind tunnel, centre of gravity, catapault, drag, embarkation, decommissioned, and spun. Mztourist ( talk) 04:41, 7 January 2016 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 18 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts! AustralianRupert ( talk) 02:56, 9 January 2016 (UTC) |
Thanks, Rupert.-- Sturmvogel 66 ( talk) 03:17, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Firedrake (H79) 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 Thewellman -- Thewellman ( talk) 04:20, 12 January 2016 (UTC)
The article German destroyer Z10 Hans Lody you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:German destroyer Z10 Hans Lody 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. MisterBee1966 ( talk) 10:15, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi, thank you for participation in Wikipedia Asian Month. Please fill out the survey that we use to collect the mailing address. All personal information will be only used for postcard sending and will be deleted immediately after the postcard is sent. If you have any question, you may contact me at Meta. Hope to see you in 2016 edition of Wikipedia Asian Month.-- AddisWang ( talk) 14:52, 15 January 2016 (UTC)
A few questions.
Working on this now. Feel free to tidy up, as usual. - Dank ( push to talk) 22:39, 18 January 2016 (UTC)
Precious again, your one of the 'Weird Sisters': "They sacrificed armour in favour of a large-calibre armament and very high speed."!
-- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 08:14, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yugoslav destroyer Split 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) 13:41, 19 January 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Firedrake (H79) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Firedrake (H79) 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 Thewellman -- Thewellman ( talk) 02:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sturmvogel,
First, I would like to state as a long-time lurker that I appreciate the effort you put into articles and your MILHIST co-ordination efforts. However, could you please explain your edit summary comment that the English variance guidelines do not apply to the First World War?
I did not note any such rule on that page. I would also note that British memorials, official histories, and (until recently) the vast majority of books published by British (and the Commonwealth and Europeans on a whole) use the term First World War/Great War, with their American counterparts using World War I. I note that the British sources used in the article utilize the term Great War, and the navbox at the bottom for British ships also uses First World War.
Kind regards, 165.166.215.220 ( talk) 16:12, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
The Tireless Contributor Barnstar | |
For everything, but particularly for the TFA today! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:24, 22 January 2016 (UTC) |
Please take a look at the talk page for Fuze-Keeping Clock. Damwiki1 ( talk) 21:48, 22 January 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 11:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sturm, were you still going to look at this? I have all my references handy... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose ( talk) 23:25, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Apologies - probably should have started with this "Talk" item. I'll look for you there. Jmg38 ( talk) 23:39, 29 January 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Fury (H76) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 16:21, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Fury (H76) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Fury (H76) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:22, 30 January 2016 (UTC)
The article Yugoslav destroyer Split you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav destroyer Split 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) 13:21, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Chacal-class destroyer 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) 14:21, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
The article Chacal-class destroyer you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Chacal-class destroyer 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) 20:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
On 5 February 2016, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article MV Imperial Transport, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when the oil tanker MV Imperial Transport broke in half after being torpedoed in 1940, a new front section was built and mated to the surviving stern? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/MV Imperial Transport. 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, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
There is plenty of info to expand the article on the pages linked from here - Code Letters, dimensions, tonnages, engine details etc. Code Letters were changed in 1934 so you should check before and after that date. Mjroots ( talk) 07:35, 5 February 2016 (UTC)
Greetings, all! We would like to announce the start of the 3rd GA Cup, a competition that seeks to encourage the reviewing of Good article nominations! Thus far, there have been two GA Cups; both 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 500 nominations listed and about 450 articles waiting to be reviewed. We hope that we can again make an impact this time. The 3rd GA Cup will begin on March 1, 2016. Four rounds are currently scheduled (which will bring the competition to a close on July 31, 2016), but this may change based on participant numbers. There will be slight changes to the scoring system, based upon feedback we've received in the months since GA Cup #2. The sign-up and submissions process will remain the same. We're also looking to spice up the competition a bit by running parallel competitions. Finally, there's a possibility of assisting a WikiProject Good Articles backlog drive in the last three weeks of February, before our competition. Please stay tuned for more information as we get it. Sign-ups for the upcoming competition are currently open and will close on February 20, 2015. 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 and MrWooHoo. 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) 02:31, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Forester (H74) 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) 21:20, 8 February 2016 (UTC)
Greetings from Wikimedia DC!
February is shaping up to be a record-breaking month for us, with nine scheduled edit-a-thons and several other events:
We hope to see you at one—or all—of these events!
Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!
Kirill Lokshin ( talk) 16:40, 10 February 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Forester (H74) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Forester (H74) 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) 20:02, 15 February 2016 (UTC)
Hi, could you please visit Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Nike-X and check if this review can be closed? Thanks MisterBee1966 ( talk) 12:12, 18 February 2016 (UTC)
I remember this one! I'll get to it today. - Dank ( push to talk) 17:31, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
Sturmvogel 66, it's been over three weeks since the nominator responded to your review. Can you please return at your next opportunity and continue the review? Many thanks. BlueMoonset ( talk) 20:20, 24 February 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 14:14, 27 February 2016 (UTC)
Based on your revert of my edit on the above, I'd be interested to know which policy/guideline forbids the improvement of an article, featured or otherwise. Thanks. Philg88 ♦ talk 17:36, 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)
Greetings, all. The 3rd Annual GA Cup has officially begun, and you can start reviewing your articles/reassessments now! However, sign-ups will not close til March 15th if anybody (who wishes to sign up) has not signed up yet. We currently have 1 group of 33 contestants in Round 1, and we will have 16 Wikipedians left in Round 2. Please be sure to review this information and the FAQ if you haven't already, If you have any questions, please ask us here where all of the judges (including our newest one, Zwerg Nase!) will be answering any questions you may have. You can also feel free to ask us on our talk pages/send an email to us (information is here). Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletters, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, 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) 03:38, 1 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) 16:05, 2 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Foxhound (H69) 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 Sainsf -- Sainsf ( talk) 07:40, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Greetings from Wikimedia DC!
Looking for something to do in DC in March? We have a series of great events planned for the month:
Can't make it to an event? Most of our edit-a-thons allow virtual participation; see the guide for more details.
Do you have an idea for a future event? Please write to us at info@wikimediadc.org!
Kirill Lokshin ( talk) 16:31, 6 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi, can I interest you and page stalkers in participating in April? Up to £200 in Amazon vouchers and books up for grabs.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:53, 9 March 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Cambrian (1916) 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) 22:21, 11 March 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Cambrian (1916) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Cambrian (1916) 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) 00:21, 13 March 2016 (UTC)
Good evening. Not sure where we are crossing wires here, so thought I'd open a discussion.
I understand and appreciate your reversions of some of the edits I made on March 12, definitely too much obvious info (a Japanese military submarine, launched in 1940 - I probably didn't need to mention it was active in World War II).
The minor edits I added on March 15 are just that, minor. They also have reasons. 1) Putting the PROPER link is absolutely good housekeeping. The entry {{Sclass|Kaidai|submarine}})
has to go through a redirect to reach Kaidai, while "type" (rather than "class") is the actual name in that article - so it is legit to replace it with the direct link and the actual name ("type") in the linked article. 2) Adding the original 2-digit name is a small edit and an ACCURATE reflection of the name of the submarines. I only came across this because I had found a few redlinks trying to talk about the 2-digit names, and researching finally led to the 3-digit updates. 3) Changing to cruiser submarine, rather than attack submarine, was to make all 18 of the articles CONSISTENT, as a number of the articles already identified the Kaidai subs as "cruiser subs". So, change all to "cruiser" or change all to "attack"? A different existing article provided the answer - the actual
Cruiser submarine article specifically shows the Kaidai subs as one of the LISTED EXAMPLES of cruiser submarines from WWI and WWII.
I'm not as confident about adding the section-specific link to the class, KD7-class, but thought it might help clarify the slightly confusing distinction (as laid out in the Kadai article), between Kadai being a general "type", itself "divided into seven classes and two sub-classes" (wording as used in the Kadai article). It is still a minor edit, providing a direct link to the "Kaidai VII (I-176 class)" section of the article, but it may be odd to have a link to an article immediately followed by a link to a section of the same article.
I'll check back here for your thoughts. Thanks. Jmg38 ( talk) 18:52, 15 March 2016 (UTC)
Hey Sturm, would you be able to take a look at Chinese corvette Yangwu and let me know if you think it'd be worthwhile nominating for GA? I'm a bit rusty on my warship work! I only worked this one up at all after I noticed there wasn't a single Chinese warship listed at WP:GA. Cheers, Miyagawa ( talk) 10:48, 27 March 2016 (UTC)
New round of book grants! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:30, 29 March 2016 (UTC)
Greetings, GA Cup competitors! Wednesday saw the end of Round 1. Sainsf took out Round 1 with an amazing score of 765. In second place, MPJ-DK earned an astounding 742 points, and in third place, FunkMonk received 610 points. In Round 1, 206 reviews were completed, more than any other year! At the beginning of March, there were 595 outstanding nominations in the GAN queue; by the end of Round 1, there were 490. We continue to make a difference at GAN and throughout Wikipedia, something we should all be proud of. Thanks to all our competitors for helping to make the GA Cup a continued success, and for your part in helping other editors improve articles. We hope to see all remaining users fighting it out in Round 2 so we can lower the backlog as much as possible. To qualify for the second round, you needed to make it into the top 16 of participants. Users were placed in 4 random pools of 4. To qualify for Round 3, the top 2 in each pool will progress, and there will also be one wildcard. This means that the participant who comes in 9th place (all pools combined) will also move on. Round 2 will start on April 1 at 0:00:01 UTC and end on April 28 at 23:59:59 UTC. Information about Round 2 and the pools can be found here Also, remember that a major rule change will go into effect starting on April 1, which marks the beginning of Round Two. Round 1 had an issue brought up in the rules, which we are correcting with this clarification. We believe that this change will make the competition more inherently fair. The new rule is: All reviews must give the nominator (or anyone else willing to improve the article) time to address the issues at hand, even if the article would qualify for what is usually called a "quick fail" in GA terms. To avoid further confusion, we have updated the scoring page, replacing the term "quick fail" with the term "fail without granting time for improvements". We expect all reviewers to put a review on hold for seven days in cases such as these as well, in order to apply the same standards to every competitor. The judges will strictly enforce this new rule. Good luck and have fun! Cheers from Figureskatingfan, 3family6, Jaguar, MrWooHoo, and Zwerg Nase. To subscribe or unsubscribe to future GA Cup newsletter, please add or remove your name to
our mailing list. If you are a participant still competing, 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) 02:38, 30 March 2016 (UTC)
I'm sure you've not forgotten but the WP:Awaken the Dragon contest starts in 4 and a half hours time. I wish you the best of luck!♦ Dr. Blofeld 18:20, 31 March 2016 (UTC)
Thanks a million for your GA review of Rachel Barrett. A pretty interesting life lived. I can't believe you've taken on Women's suffrage in Wales, it's a meaty article. Please take your time. I will not be upset if this article does not get GA within the competition deadline, it is important to me that this article is treated correctly. So feel no pressure from my side to get this reviewed correctly. All the best. FruitMonkey ( talk) 23:13, 1 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Howe (1885) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Howe (1885) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 20:01, 9 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Cardiff (D58) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Cardiff (D58) 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 Zawed -- Zawed ( talk) 08:41, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry if it wasn't clear, but you don't get two sets of points for the same articles. You can enter them either in the main entry or Core attack sections. Obviously you get more from doing it as part of the core attack one so I've left them there and removed the others. ♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:16, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Prince of Wales (1902) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Prince of Wales (1902) 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) 23:01, 10 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Iron Duke (1870) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 11:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Anson (1886) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 12:01, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Anson (1886) 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:HMS Anson (1886) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 12:20, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Iron Duke (1870) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Iron Duke (1870) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 18:21, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Anson (1886) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Anson (1886) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 19:42, 11 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Collingwood (1882) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 10:40, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Collingwood (1882) 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:HMS Collingwood (1882) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 13:20, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Collingwood (1882) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Collingwood (1882) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:21, 12 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Amphion (1911) 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) 12:20, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Amphion (1911) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Amphion (1911) 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) 20:01, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Active (1911) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 20:20, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Active (1911) 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:HMS Active (1911) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 20:40, 13 April 2016 (UTC)
Just in case you hadn't seen the notice, this starts tomorrow. The most prolific new article creators have the chance to earn a lot of points from this over the weekend!♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:15, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Active (1911) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Active (1911) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 17:21, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Active-class cruiser 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 18:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
Hello, Sturmvogel 66! Thank you very much for the review of the article. It took me so long to respond because I have been very busy at work these days. I have corrected the article as per your recommendations. In a few hours I am going abroad and will not be able to respond to any further recommendations until 24 April 2016. Best regards, -- Gligan ( talk) 18:31, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The article Active-class cruiser 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:Active-class cruiser for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:20, 14 April 2016 (UTC)
The article Active-class cruiser you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Active-class cruiser 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 13:01, 15 April 2016 (UTC)
"HMS Spey was a 10-gun Cherokee-class brig-sloop built for the Royal Navy during the 1810s. " I think it needs tweaking to 1820s rather than 1810s. Easily done, unless you meant that of course!♦ Dr. Blofeld 20:10, 16 April 2016 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 20 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period January to March 2016. Thank you for your efforts! Anotherclown ( talk) 10:49, 19 April 2016 (UTC) |
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Dreadnought (1875) 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) 17:20, 20 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Thunderer (1872) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 11:20, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Dreadnought (1875) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Dreadnought (1875) 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) 12:01, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Thunderer (1872) 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:HMS Thunderer (1872) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 14:40, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Thunderer (1872) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Thunderer (1872) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:21, 21 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Penelope (1867) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:00, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Inconstant (1868) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:01, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Penelope (1867) 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:HMS Penelope (1867) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Inconstant (1868) 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:HMS Inconstant (1868) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:20, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
That wasn't me. That was an impostor User:Linguist1111, who was forging my signature. Linguist 111 talk 23:25, 22 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi Sturm, quick question. I have just had a large amount of GANs I submitted early in the round owing to the length it usually takes to get a review. Since then I note that I am in a good position to proceed to the next round and thus don't need the points. However as the reviews are mostly all coming now, if they are passed then I feel I would be obliged to enter them this round when I don't need to. I would like to ask, would it be possible in lieu of the tables, for any GAs that pass between now and the start of the next round be held back and be permitted to be submitted the next round please? The C of E God Save the Queen! ( talk) 09:54, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Penelope (1867) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Penelope (1867) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 12:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Inconstant (1868) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Inconstant (1868) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 12:21, 23 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Drake (1901) 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) 15:00, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Repulse (1892) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 18:01, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Repulse (1892) 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:HMS Repulse (1892) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 18:20, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Repulse (1892) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Repulse (1892) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:21, 24 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Drake (1901) 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:HMS Drake (1901) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Wizardman -- Wizardman ( talk) 03:01, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Aurora (1887) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 08:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Nile (1888) 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 Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 10:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Denbigh Castle (K696) 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 Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 10:20, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Aurora (1887) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Aurora (1887) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 15:21, 25 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Drake (1901) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Drake (1901) 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) 01:41, 26 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Empress of India 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) 12:20, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Ajax (1880) 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) 21:01, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
I've been totting up the prizes for the contest and working out what I've given or promised. I couldn't remember if I promised £20 for most articles in Core Attack or not. You're on to get £10 for GAs and got a 500 bonus for doing 20 anyway. I think Miyagawa (if things remain the same) deserves £25 for third place, that leaves £20. You OK with me putting that final £20 into the Finale so there's £120 (roughly $175) to play for? I can't see anywhere on the Core Attack page I promised £20, on the main page it was just what I had intended putting into the different ones. Up to you. You are getting £10 and 500 bonus for most GAs and got 500 for the most core expansions which is already pretty generous.♦ Dr. Blofeld 13:32, 28 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Nile (1888) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Nile (1888) 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 Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 10:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Empress of India you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Empress of India 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) 12:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Ajax (1880) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Ajax (1880) 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) 12:21, 29 April 2016 (UTC)
|
The Bugle is published by the
Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please
join the project or sign up
here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from
this page. Your editors,
Ian Rose (
talk) and
Nick-D (
talk) 01:38, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Sorry for the late notice; this just got scheduled today. Working on it now. Brian and Hawkeye decided to put Battle of the Coral Sea off until the 75th anniversary. - Dank ( push to talk) 14:37, 30 April 2016 (UTC)
Precious again, your ship, + your GA sailing below is just stunning
says GA (who is close to one a week for a year, need to write one more and to have approved several more, see WP:QAIPOST) -- Gerda Arendt ( talk) 06:05, 4 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Andromeda (1897) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 14:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Flint Castle (K383) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 14:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Andromeda (1897) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Andromeda (1897) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 17:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
While you're doing good work do you think you could vary it a little and do say a village and biography and then return to architecture? The idea really was that each entry is a different subject, but I can see that would be difficult, and you're doing good work so not complaining!♦ Dr. Blofeld 17:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Flint Castle (K383) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Flint Castle (K383) 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 Dr. Blofeld -- Dr. Blofeld ( talk) 17:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Blonde (1910) 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa ( talk) 20:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Blanche (1909) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:20, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Bellona (1909) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Thisbe (1824) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Blanche (1909) 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:HMS Blanche (1909) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Bellona (1909) 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:HMS Bellona (1909) for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:40, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Thisbe (1824) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Thisbe (1824) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 21:41, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Denbigh Castle (K696) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Denbigh Castle (K696) 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 Wilhelmina Will -- Wilhelmina Will ( talk) 22:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Blonde (1910) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Blonde (1910) 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa ( talk) 22:21, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Blanche (1909) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Blanche (1909) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 23:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Bellona (1909) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Bellona (1909) 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 Jaguar -- Jaguar ( talk) 23:01, 1 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Boadicea-class cruiser 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) 12:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Blonde-class cruiser 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) 12:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Boadicea (1908) 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa ( talk) 16:20, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
The article HMS Boadicea (1908) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Boadicea (1908) 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 Miyagawa -- Miyagawa ( talk) 19:21, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
The article Boadicea-class cruiser you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Boadicea-class cruiser 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) 20:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)
The article Blonde-class cruiser you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Blonde-class cruiser 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) 20:01, 2 May 2016 (UTC)