This is an archive of past discussions with User:Buggie111. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Welcome!
Hello, Buggie111/Two year archive, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are a few good links for newcomers:
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your name on talk pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and someone will show up shortly to answer your questions.
I have yet to tell you how my account was born.
LOL.
I posted somthuing in the village pump two days ago, and was suspected of being a sock puppet. But, enough with that. I am now currently trying to expand the article on Bronnitsy ( my Russian hometown) by translating it from Russian to English.
Well, best of luck with the translation! This kind of work is always appreciated. If you need help or have questions, don't hesitate to post on WT:RUSSIA, or feel free to contact me directly. Best,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 19:30, November 30, 2009 (UTC)
Shane Day
Hiya, thanks for volunteering to work on Shane Day. His official bio hasn't been posted at [1] yet, but here's the link to his cached 49ers bio:
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
I know talking to a bot is stupid, but I remembered that one second after I saved and placed it in immedietly. Whoops, forgot to sign Buggie111 (talk) 17:33, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Welcome!
Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.
A few features that you might find helpful:
Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
The project has a stress hotline available for your use.
If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Kirill[talk][prof]04:46, 4 December 2009 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XIV (November 2009)
The November 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:57, 21 December 2009 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVI (December 2009)
The December 2009 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:42, 3 January 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for asking me. Your edits tell me you have made a good begining, and I am sure that you will keep up the good work. Cheers.-Shahab (talk) 11:11, 19 January 2010 (UTC)
If you would rather wait for a specific editor (I don't mind if you do), I suggest you post messages asking about adoption to their talk pages and add the adoptme template back on to your user page to show you are still waiting for more offers. Then you can get back to me in a few days if nothing comes of it. strdst_grl(call me Stardust)09:39, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
Well, I don't really know why I asked to be adopted. To be certain, my questions have already been answered by me staring at the MoS page for 5 hours. So, I don't see the need for it.
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 00:31, 24 January 2010 (UTC)
I have also left you a quick review, with suggestions of other locations you could help out. Hope this helps, contact me if you have any questions at all. Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 16:32, 4 February 2010 (UTC)
re Redirecting a skeleton
Hi. I am unable to redirect an ip account page. This is because the ip is not tied to you, the editor, and may be used by another editor at some future date. The notice on the ip talkpage notes that it belongs to an ISP's pool, so this is quite likely. As long as you edit appropriately with this account, then there is no need to look at edits from earlier ip addresses. I hope this answers your query. LessHeard vanU (talk) 13:27, 2 February 2010 (UTC)
Thank you. And I will not make any more good of the order edits.
Hi, Buggie! I think your best bet would be to present this new format at WP:SOVMETRO. I am not a member of that project, but I think its participants would be interested to look at your proposal.
If you want my personal opinion, though, I think that upgrading the list is a good idea overall, but I don't quite like the implementation. For my tastes, there's too much pink, the table borders are too thick, the navigational template could use some cleanup, and the table layout still needs work. But I think you are on the right track with this. Hope this helps. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); 14:41, February 4, 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVII (January 2010)
The January 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 03:03, 5 February 2010 (UTC)
Buggie111/Two year archive - Thanks for your participation and support in my recent successful RfA. Your confidence and trust in me is much appreciated. As a new admin I will try hard to keep from wading in too deep over the tops of my waders, nor shall I let the Buffalo intimidate me.--Mike Cline (talk) 09:12, 12 February 2010 (UTC)
When I first looked at the picture, I didn't know what a Green Beret was doing in the middle of the Great Plains. But I understand it now. Good Luck with the mop.
Please do not remove information from the article on Moscow monorail
I do not think that this is a good idea. The section is supposed to have a brief, but complete overview of Russian monorail design. I will expand these sentences later. SA ru (talk) 15:45, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
I know. It just looked like as if it wouldn't be expanded. Buggie111 (talk) 16:11, 14 February 2010 (UTC)
Thanks for reverting vandalism to my userpage a few days ago, it was so fast and efficient I didn't even notice it till now! Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 00:18, 18 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any problem with it; but if it is supposed to be smaller, can you give me the link to the original template? (Assuming that there was an original template in the template namespace that was smaller and off to the side.) Cheers – Samwb123T (R)-C-E23:43, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
I don't see any small version - did you only use preview and not save for the intermediate versions? - there are only 2 versions in the page history. The only error is see is no closing to the table - you need to add |} at the end. Ronhjones (Talk)00:30, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
Sorry for the delay, but I can give you the ru.wiki page, to show an idea of what I wanted. [3]
In regards to your question on my talk page, I think when in doubt bring it up on the contest talk page. This first month we'll probably be making a few 'rules' up as we go so it is probably the best idea to have input from everyone that is participating. By opinion by the way is to give yourself the points. It's all in good fun and whatever keeps folks motivated enough to work on the backlog is a good think. J04n(talk page)21:14, 2 March 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLVIII (February 2010)
The February 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 22:01, 4 March 2010 (UTC)
My apologies - it seems I didn't communicate my opinion clearly enough. I have no opinion, either way, about your question, and no intention or desire that you remove it. Nor do I think it disruptive, or anything else for that matter - my apologies for confusing you.
I do, however, have an opinion about your assessment, and my opinion is that I agree with your assessment.
Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 17:24, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
re:Battle of the Arges
Greetings, I think that a proper name for such an article would be "Battle of the Arges". Unfortunately, the amount of reliable English sources regarding Romania in World War I is very limited so it would be almost impossible to make a broad article on this topic. Feel free to create the article, add as much info as you can, and I'll promise to look over it and try to improve its quality. Regarding your adminship offer, I wish to thank you for it but I'll be forced to decline since my wiki-time is currently very limited and I'm considering even not to candidate for another term as a WPMILHIST coordinator. Thanks and best regards, --Eurocopter (talk) 20:59, 5 March 2010 (UTC)
re: Your Edits to Nagato class
Your fix of that really clumsy sentence was good, but you lost some content there. That treaty prohibited the building of new battleships with one minor exception, except to replace old ones. So both the US and Japan (probably Great Britain also, but I haven't read that much about British battelships) did extensive rebuilds of most of their existing ships. I'm going to edit your edit and see what you think, but possibly not today.--Busaccsb (talk) 19:08, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
A link to the full text of the treaty can be found on the Washington Naval Treaty page. The treaty was pretty amazing. It stipulated a 5:5:3 ratio of capital ship tonnage for the US, Britain, and Japan and stipulated exactly which ships (by name) were to be kept and which were to be scrapped. Almost all capital ships under construction were to be scrapped. A couple were allowed to be completed to their original design, and a couple were allowed to be completed as carriers. Construction of only two new ships was authorized: the Britis were allowed to build two ships (the Nelson) class. These and all future capital ships were limited to 35,000 tons. All the ships to be kept were allowed to be scrapped and replaced after 20 years (and this is spelled out ship by ship). In case of accidental loss, a ship could be replaced immediately. As for modernizations, the treaty also spelled out what kinds of modernizations were allowable, and this had a tonnage limit. --Busaccsb (talk) 23:14, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
I was surprised to read In other words, your how (this editor) should look like. This reads to me as a personal attack on the editor which you named - and seems unnecessary to the RfA it was placed on.
I wouldn't object to you contacting the named editor and making a comment along those lines on their talk page, but I feel that it is inappropriate on the above RfA, and so I would like to ask that you remove that part of your support (rather than to strike it out, as then it would still be there) - I may agree with your sentiments, but BigDom's RfA is not the place to put it!
Incidently, I know I have made a comment about another editor's neutral vote which could be seen as approaching a personal attack, but the difference is that the editor has (a) left a !vote (b) will be watching the page, and can respond. The editor you linked to in your comment has not commented on the RfA, and may not do so, so we have no way of knowing if they will see your comment and have the opportunity to respond to it if they should want to do so.
I thought I'd add this, as I don't want you to think that I'm being hypocritical! If the other editor had left a !vote or a comment on BigDom's RfA, I would not have contacted you. -- PhantomSteve/talk|contribs\ 11:10, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Apologies. I'll reqord that vote. I really did not want to make a personal attack. I just ment that he's a good role model. Buggie111 (talk) 14:28, 17 March 2010 (UTC)
Hey, you got mixed up between the class article, which you claimed, and the ship article, which is the one you actually reviewed, on the WP:GAN page. You need to fix it to prevent confusion and to get your second opinion directed to the right place.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 07:11, 7 March 2010 (UTC)
If we can get it to the point of being a viable article, I'm all for including it. As for Paris, that's somewhat peripheral to Normandy, which officially ended with the closing of the Falaise Gap on 21 August. Paris was a few days later and wasn't technically part of the Battle of Normandy in that regard. Cam(Chat)15:57, 20 March 2010 (UTC)
Likewise. Just a quick note to thank you for your support at the election, very much appreciated. See you around the Milhist pages! Ranger Steve (talk) 20:43, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
Moscow monorail
Oh wow, I'm not sure I'm the right person for this task. I'm neither a metro enthusiast, nor an engineer, nor even really a techie, and that section uses a lot of very specialized terminology. I could certainly try and do my best, and the result will probably even make some sense in English, but if you can think of a different person to ask, I'd recommend you try them first. Please let me know what you decide. Cheers,—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); March 27, 2010; 20:31 (UTC)
When you are redirecting articles, be sure to go back and blank the talk pages, and not to leave a redirect on the talk pages. Otherwise the redirects will still show up as assessed articles in the assessment categories of the wikiprojects. -MBK004 23:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Ok. Sorry. Buggie111 (talk) 23:10, 26 March 2010 (UTC)
Most wikiproject banner templates allow for an "NA" class and some even a "Redirect" class, so it's not necessary to blank the talk page, and definitely not advisable if there's any existing discussion history on the talk page. -- Ϫ09:19, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
You're fast!
I just felt the earthquake, and see you've already put up a stub! Wikipedia is where to go for news these days it seems ... Antandrus (talk) 23:02, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Yup. I got a "friendly pointer" that all the things in our house were shaking. I always wanted to be the creator of such an article. Buggie111 (talk) 23:03, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I noticed you picked this article up. Just wanted to drop you a note that this is actually my first GA nom (I've worked on others but never nominated one myself) so please be patient and extra understanding.radek (talk) 23:30, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
On 5 April 2010, In the news was updated with a news item that involved the article 2010 Baja California earthquake, which you created. If you know of another interesting news item involving a recently created or updated article, then please suggest it on the candidates page.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
The March 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:23, 7 April 2010 (UTC)
Are you intending to carry on with this? It is marked as 2nd opinion at WP:GAN, but no review has been undertaken yet? –– Jezhotwells (talk) 00:57, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Nope. I know that I shouldn't abbandon things in mid-stride, but yes. I've notified the user, so, if you want to do the review,you can do all of the aspec ts that I have not covered. See you along! Buggie111 (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
OK, for future reference, it is best to leave a note at WT:GA or the drive talk page, if you have to abandon, but no worries, I shall review it later today. –– Jezhotwells (talk) 01:04, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
Hi, I saw you'd translated the Norwegian, but it looks like a machine translation? I fixed it up, but if you did get it from Google Translate or somewhere, you should know that's held to be worse than no translation, because the output never makes much sense. --Yngvadottir (talk) 07:36, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I took it for too much of a given, since the lyrics in English looked comprhensible. I'll stick to Russian and Spanish. Buggie111 (talk) 13:28, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey, we hammered that article out pretty well. I saw you nominated it for DYK, do you mind if I add my name to the nomination to get credit for it too? Parsecboy (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
Sure..., just found another ref, but not much to add. Buggie111 (talk) 16:06, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
IMHO, you should nominate it for a GA now. I've gone through it and fixed several issues that would result in a quick fail (periods and commas after the citation, inconsitencies ect..) I've even added a few citations myself and expanded the last paragraph a very little bit. I think that this article is good to go.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up17:17, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
I was updating the Regina Elena infobox to include conversions and noticed that Jane's Battleships differs significantly from Conway's which is what I used. I'm going to bring this up at the OMT talk page so we can get other people to check their sources as I'm not sure that Jane's isn't just a reprint of the contemporary wartime (and unreliable) volumes of Jane's Fighting Ships. I had planned to work on this class this week as I told you when I said that I had no plans for the Franz Ferdinand. My normal policy is not to claim a ship or class until I'm ready to work on it, but you've claimed a number well in excess of your ability to work in the immediate future. Please trim back your plans to include only those ships that you can write about now. You can always reclaim them whenever you're ready to work on them if nobody else has started work. Please note that my name and Parsecboy's may be all over the page, but only on articles we've worked on or plan to shortly.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:56, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
I know, mister 50 GA writer. I didn't really want to be "Just like the big league players", but basically just thought that getting a couple of facts into one-sentance stubs wouldn't hurt. I'll trim down a lot (heck with it, a gets me another wiki-space edit). And also, I'll try to either a.Get the Conway's book or b.) cut back on Armament citing from Janes and only use it for history (which it describes in a very short and annoying manenr). See ya, Buggie111 (talk) 01:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
do you want to help me out with this one? We can get it to a DYK then a GA in a week or so. Just be sure to allow me to add stuff in as well! I call adding in sources from teh external links that are already in the article and you can...well I'm not sure but my library on French warships is somewhat lacking so those are the only sources I've got to use while you seem to own several books on the subject. Thanks!--White Shadowsyou're breaking up01:56, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Hey man, thanks for your additions to USS Oklahoma (BB-37)! However, could I ask you to add page numbers in place of the chapters? The "Chapter" field is meant for individual sections of books (something like the country sections in Conway's), and page numbers are required for any assessment of B or above. Thanks! :) —Ed(talk • majestic titan)04:12, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Oh, and one more thing: the book's language is English, no |language= is required in the template, as it is assumed. If you want, I'd be happy to collaborate with you on this article in the summer. I did write USS Nevada (BB-36), after all... ;) —Ed(talk • majestic titan)19:05, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
In the summer, I'll be here, my Russian hometown, with nearly no opportunity to edit. We could do so now, or in late July. Either is fine. Buggie111 (talk) 19:08, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
1.5 weeks. Hmmm, that's about a week before my check in date for my book. So what, I'm fine with that. I can't get it right now, as I'm going to have to leave in 10 minutes. You've got too many exams to start this later today? Buggie111 (talk) 19:17, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I missed your reply. I can't start helping until roughly Wednesday or Thursday, because that's when I will be truly free and at home with my books again. —Ed(talk • majestic titan)18:29, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Look, first, I'm fine with Republique. I'm fine with anything. Second, I don't care if I get let out. I've had time cosntraints and so forth. But, heck with it. Let's go. Buggie111 (talk) 00:04, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
Your so kind, and fast. I'm going to start Virbuis Unitus later today if I have time.I hsould never have let this editor see OMT. Buggie111 (talk) 00:12, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far.
We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns.
First off, on behalf of myself and my co-coordinator Wizardman, I would like to thank you for the efforts that you have made so far in this GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a success, and that is thanks to you. See this Signpost article about what this drive has achieved so far.
We're currently heading into the final week of the drive. At this time, if you have any GANs on review or on hold, you should be finishing off those reviews. Right now, we have more GANs on review or on hold than we do unreviewed. If you're going to start a GA review, please do so now so you can complete it by the end of the month and so that the nominator has a full 7-day window to address any concerns.
On April 23, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Colorado State Highway 263, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Just wanted to thank you for providing the translation. What a wonderful song! Just need to find the tune now... ;-) Thanks again. Best wishes --Haruth (talk) 10:18, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Please don't add hooks to existing DYK panels as you did here. There is a holding area for hooks on the talk page, and I am trying to keep the national variety throughout each panel so once enough different nationalities are available, I create another panel for the portal. To that end I try to not put a German and Austro-Hungarian hook on the same panel, as you did. -MBK004 20:30, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Ahh, I see. Well, sorry there. And thanks for mopping up after all of my mistakes. Buggie111 (talk) 20:43, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
Excuse me, but I would appriciate it if you would make this article like this article (as in article format) so the article can be later nominated for GA status. Thank You. --Nascar199623:59, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
Could you please remove all the references exept the first and the last one. Also can you please spell Kevin Harvick right. I may have to completely redo the first ten laps to show you how I would like it to be done, but your work will be hidden if you want to change it back. I have three good article, working on my fourth, and all of them are 2010 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series races. Thanks. Sorry for this inconvienience. --Nascar199601:56, 26 April 2010 (UTC)
I finished the Race Summary; so if you want, you can finish the Results. Thanks for trying to help with the article; it is well appriciated. Also if the article makes it to GA, you will get part of the credit. Thanks again --Nascar199600:56, 28 April 2010 (UTC).
DYK for Number 13 class battleship
On April 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Number 13 class battleship, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Kii class battleship, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 28, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article German submarine U-450, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Babenberg, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Árpád, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Prinz Eugen, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On April 30, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Tegetthoff, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Hello, Buggie111. You have new messages at Mlpearc's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
On May 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Mediterranean Division, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Thank you for your participation in the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive
GAN backlog elimination drives chart up to 1 May
On behalf of my co-coordinator Wizardman, I'd like to especially thank you for your efforts over this past month's GAN backlog elimination drive. It has been nothing short of a complete success, which hopefully results in more expedient good article reviews, increasing users' confidence in the good article nomination processes. Even if you made just a small contribution, it still helped contribute to the success of this drive. Here is what we have accomplished this last month in this drive.
661 total nominations were reviewed. 541 of them passed (~81.8%), 97 (~14.7%) failed, and 23 (~3.5%) ended on hold.
Excluding extremes, the longest wait for someone's GAN to be review was about 11.5 weeks at the beginning. (I mistook the figure when I reported to the Signpost that it was 13.) At the end, with the exception of one that was relisted, the longest wait is now at 10 days.
63 different users participated, each having completed at least one GAN, with others also having helped out behind-the-scenes in making the drive a success.
The drive started with 463 GA nominations remaining and 388 unreviewed. At the end of the month, we ended with 89 remaining (374 or about 80.8% less) and 47 unreviewed (341 or about 87.9% less).
For those who have accomplished certain objectives in the drive, awards will be coming shortly. Again, thank you for your help in the drive, and I hope you continue to help review GA nominations and overall improve the quality of articles here on Wikipedia.
Thanks for your support at my RfA. I was a little surprised by the nomination, and I am unable to go through with it at this time, but I appreciate your support. Regards, P. D. CookTalk to me!17:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Start class to GA
Is there some reason why you're bypassing a B-class assessment and going directly to GA? The more eyes on an article the better it will be. Especially with typos, etc. And you've missed one major sortie in the Viribis Unitis article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:02, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, that's the one. I'm not saying that you should withdraw your current nominations, but I'd strongly suggest going over them again to catch the little stuff like typos, incomplete citations, etc. Don't be in such a rush to get a GA in the future; like many things articles are often better the more time that you spend with them. The extra time allows you to go through them and see what you actually wrote, versus what you meant to say.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 22:34, 2 May 2010 (UTC)
Don't forget to mark your entries from the Requests page
On behalf of the coordinator of the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors Backlog elimination drive for May 2010, ɳorɑfʈ Talk!, I would like to thank you for your active participation in the Drive.
I am writing to inform you that we have introduced additional Guild of Copy Editors' Gold Star Awards for the drive.
To qualify, you will need to add an asterisk to all the full copyedits you have completed from the Requests page. More information can be found in the awards section of the Drive. If you have any questions, please post them to the Drive's talk page.
Once again, thank you for participating, and we look forward to a meaningful drop in the numbers due to your hard work and efforts.
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)
The April 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 19:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)
DYK for French battleship Masséna
On May 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article French battleship Masséna, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On May 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-50, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Since you nominated Franz Fedinand for an A-class review. How about nominateing the three Habsburg class artcles for a A-class review for me? You can get co-nom credit for Babenberg and the other ones if you fix any issues and I give you permission to "forge" my signature on the review as I'll not be editing that much for a few days. Thanks!--White Shadowsyou're breaking up10:33, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 7, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Russian battleship Oslyabya, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Given the comments about how most of the pages describe the class, perhaps you could simply combine the pages into a single one for the class as a whole, with sections for each ship, and submit that? The Z35/Z36 sinking would be decidedly intriguing (and much better sounding than "Z44 escorted a battleship", since that's what destroyers do. :) ) -The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed21:37, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
The German WW2 destroyers need a lot of love. Each class should have its own page with summaries of the individual ship histories plus the usual individual ship pages. There's plenty of material out there in English, you just have to have the right couple of books.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:03, 7 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, can you do me a favor? Will you please copy the lead paragraph (and any refs in them) from U-39 to U-44 into the respective sections in my sandbox article? I'll then re-word it and add any more citations or aditional info required. Thanks!--White Shadowsyou're breaking up17:33, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I was "going" to do so, but procrastinated. I'm going to do so now, along with the a-class for habsburg and the others. Buggie111 (talk) 17:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. Now I'll soon get 3 A-class articles, one DYK and that may turn into a GA soon which will in turn lead to another GT! You really are a very productive editor. And I heard that you want to apply for adminship one day. Well here's some tips: Never get blocked, never edit war, never lash out, and try to work in admin related areas. If you follow that, I'll happily nominate you in Say late this year like October-December. Thanks again!--White Shadowsyou're breaking up17:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
K. I'm leaving soon, but I'll get the A's done right now. I'm mostly active at CSD, but I only have ~70 deleted contribs. Thanks! Buggie111 (talk) 17:42, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks and I"ll give you co-nom credit for Babenberg and the others since you put in alot of hard work. And since A-class is so close to FA that there really is no diffrence, I since a FAC for the three comeing up soon...--White Shadowsyou're breaking up17:50, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Before you two go whole hog on the Type IXA thing I'd recommend that you get a consensus that people would like an article on every variant of a Uboat type, because I certainly don't. I don't have a problem with a list to organize a GT around, but an article for a sub-class is not appropriate, IMO. And y'all might remember that the standards for completeness are much higher at ACR or FAC than they are at GA, so y'all are going to need more data on peacetime activities, IMO.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
But that's the thing. Austro-Hungarian battleships did litteraly NOTHING in peace time and rotted away in port. Not much to write about. And I would'nt really like articles for every sub class but take a look at my sandbox. Are you trying to say that all of that work was for nothing. Sorry but I'm not letting all of those hours go to waste. I can tweak it a bit but We need an article for Type IXA submarines in order to get them to a GT. You're the one who told me that in the first place.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up18:22, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
No, read it again; I said either an article or a list would do for a GT and I'd oppose an article on any sub-class. But that's just me and you're ignoring my recommendation to discuss the issue at WP:SHIPS. I've already had one article fail FAC for lack of completeness myself so don't spin me a tale of woe and wasted hours; some articles will never make FA or even A-class if the sources aren't good enough. And sources for lots of ships are damn scanty, to include many, many pre-dreadnoughts as well as dreadnoughts of minor nations, unless you read their native language. You really believe that the Austro-Hungarian Navy never once conducted tactical maneuvers during peacetime?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:58, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
We know of 1 set of training maneuvers that the fell conducted just a few years prior to WWI. It's already been mentioned in all three of the articles. And I'm not ignoreing you, I'll bring it up on WP:SHIPS. Hoever, if a list is required, what am I going to do with this? And the only thing that I can bring a list up to is FL status. I doubt that that sub-class could make it to that.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up19:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, and we'll have all those tpye articles to work on. Not bad, just should take some time. And I'm fine with anything. Buggie111 (talk) 19:30, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Because I need either an article or a list of Type IXa submarines to get to GA or FL class in order to get a GTC for all 8 of the U-boats in that class. If we merge it into that article, I'll need to bring the whole thing up to GA status. (Which I'm not about to attempt)--White Shadowsyou're breaking up19:34, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I see your point, and I think the sub-class would be better, as the listswould be a bit hard to format, think writing somthing like List of Habsburg class battleships. The IX page already partially listifies the class, so I'm a bit puzzled. And why is my WP:ER template at the top of the page not working! Cmon, eight non-me edits within the past two hours, and no reviews. I'd be very happy if this was fixed. Buggie111 (talk) 19:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
But what I'm saying is, I do not want to try to promote the entire set of Type IX submarines when I'm only working on 8 U-boats from one sub-class. In other words, It's a waste of time to do that.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up20:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Multiple ongoing article reviews
Buggie, I have to ask you to withdraw two of your three open ACRs. We have an unwritten rule on allowing one open review at a time like FAC. We relax that rule occasionally for those editors who have massive amounts of experience in writing quality articles, but this is rare. The reasons for this rule is so that the reviewers are not exhausted by reviewing three similar to identical articles at the same time as well as reducing the strain on the entire system (which admittedly is not a problem currently due to the low amount of reviews). Also, editors who are new to the system have found having more than one review ongoing can be a strain on their priorities as well. -MBK00421:05, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Edit, I just noticed that you acutally have four open and as co-nom with Parsec on one and WS on three. Two of the three you have just listed need to be withdrawn. -MBK00421:08, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
K, I'll take off two of tem, and will re-transclude the two once the others finish up. Sorry for any trouble. Buggie111 (talk) 21:10, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm fine with that, but I'd like you to remove Babenberg. I added, so to say, most of the info, and mostly fixed GAN probs. On habsburg I fixed nearly all of them, so that's my criteria for both. I just glanced over Arpad, so could you please take it? If not, than take Babenberg. It's just a preference. Buggie111 (talk) 21:14, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
I'll take Arpad since I wrote it and we can share credit for Habsburg since I wrote it but you got it to GA status. And once you are able to, You can have Babenberg I if you want, I can get co-nom since you did most of the work there.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up21:17, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
So which reviews are staying and which are gone, and who are the noms. That way I know which ones to clean-up with my delete button per WP:CSD#G6, before making the notifications. -MBK00421:28, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
Ahh, I see that Babenberg is withdrawn and the responsibility for Arpad has been shifted. I will go ahead and delete the nom for Babenberg, and you can re-create it once the time comes for that nomination. -MBK00421:35, 8 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Brazilian battleship Riachuelo, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On May 9, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article USS Washington (BB-47), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Thanks for correcting "1886". I don't know that much about the ship but I was willing to bet that was a hasty typo. Adding a ref is icing on the cake. Cheers.--Phyllis1753 (talk) 15:21, 9 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 13, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Type 1936B destroyer, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Arapiles is yours, no problem. :) Sorry if I stepped on your toes there, had been eyeing DudT's page on the es.wikipedia for a bit and the bug to do it finally chomped. Puigcerdá needs a better translation too, BTW - I threw up my hands halfway through trying to make heads or tails of the Google Translate of its page! - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed01:14, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Nope, didn't hit my toes. I wondered how I could DYK qualify that, as it had already been written. Now that DYK cehck won't work (on vecotr), you managed to do it. Congrats. And I'll do Puigcerda.. Buggie111 (talk) 01:17, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Thanks. I think the only part of the translation that survived to the final product was the line about the re-use of armour. I just need to get my hands on the appropriate Conway's now to see how much more it can be improved. - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed02:04, 14 May 2010 (UTC)
Richelieu class
I saw you tagged the article at OMT; I wanted to let you know I've got Jordan & Dumas's French Battleships: 1922-1956 (and I think Ed has a couple of sources for the class too). If you need any help, just let me know. Parsecboy (talk) 01:49, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
@ Woody. Apologies, you were thinking of Riachuelo. The one above is a French ship, so I moved your post. Ed put that tag on to make the table, but frogot to add the belt armor. I think you can remove it. Buggie111 (talk) 13:53, 15 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi, your idea was good except that various facts were so incorrect that I thought it was beter to remove the info than display incorrect information. Example : the Admiral class's main guns were mounted in barbettes, not in turrets. This distinction is important in a warship. You stated that that the secondary guns were 13.5 inch - they were in fact 6-inch. The photo you added of a 3-pounder Hotchkiss shows the gun on a different type of mounting to what they were mounted on on the Admirals - i.e. the picture was misleading, if you use an image it should relate directly to the subject, not indirectly. So I would recommend that for historical stuff you think about each fact as you type it - ask "is this correct for this article, do I understand what it means and does it make sense" - sometimes even published authors make silly mistakes and we don't need to copy their mistakes into Wikipedia. But your idea and intention is good, so please don't give up just because I reverted your edit. regards, Rod. Rcbutcher (talk) 15:57, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
If those were all of the problems, than I can fix them. And I knew that the secondary were six inchers, I just forgot to copy and paste the correct link from the infobox. I'll go fix them now. Buggie111 (talk) 16:04, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
I am sorry - but I think you need to understand more about ships in order to describe them. Let me use protection as an example:
The Admirals had a short waterline armoured belt. (You might want to do some reading about belts so you fully understand them.)
On top of the belt they had a flat armoured deck
As the belt did not protect the waterline at the ends, the Admirals had an underwater armoured deck to protect this. On top of this armoured deck, they had a lot of subdivision, and probably had some materials such as cork or woodite - you would have to check. The purpose of cork or woodite was to be a space filler that was lighter than water, which would preserve some flotation even if the ends of the ships were letting in water due to damage in action
The Admirals also used their coal bunkers to enhance protection.
As I mentioned, they had short belts. The belts are on the sides of the ship. At the front and rear ends of the belt they had an armoured bulkhead joining them. This bulkhead was carried up to a level that protected the 6-inch gun battery from end on fire. The Nelson had something similar.
The main armament was mounted in two armoured barbettes. There was an armoured trunk connecting each barbette with its magazines, which were below the armoured deck. The mounting of the main guns were in what were called 'semi-disappearing barbettes'. This was a development of the Moncrief carriage barbette mounting in the Temeraire.
I think that the 6-inch gun battery was protected from amchine gun fire by 1-inch plate at the front. This would need checking
There was also an armoured conning tower.
The ships had torpedo nets
You can see that the protection is actually quite complicated.
Then there is the armament.
The Collingwood had 12-inch breechloaders of an unsatisfactory design, it took time for the manfacturers to make some that were safe enough to be used with service charges - high powered breechloaders were hard to get right - other nations had problems too at the same time.
The Anson, etc. had 13.5-inch breechloaders. This design was much more sucessful - presumably because of experience with the 12-inch breechloaders.
The Benbow had 16.25-inch breechloaders - this was like the 13.5-inch design, but pushed the technology so far. They suffered from barrel droop (do you know what that means?), and short firing life.
The Benbow had more 6-inch guns in the secondary battery than the others.
There were also the smaller guns - whcih included machine guns. Machine guns from the ships were used in the bombardment of Alexandria in 1882.
The ships had torpedo tubes/launchers.
The ships carried 'second class torpedo boats'.
There were some guns mounted on ships boats, and at least a couple of small artillery pieces to be used by shore parties.
It is also worth considering how much ammunition was carried. Some ships like the Italian Duilio saved weight by carrying less ammunition.
What is known about fire control on these ships?
Movement.
What were their trial speeds?
Did they have forced draught?
What was their coal endurance?
What was their turning circle?
Other qualities of the ships.
Of six ships, there were four subgroups, each of different displacements.
Hi there; I have re-visited the article, and have posted on talk. In view of the constructive advice that he has posted here, I am not certain how I can help. You will appreciate that my involvement in the article was the creation of a stub about four years ago. I do not wholly agree that deletion and re-write is the best way forward; I feel that a great deal of the deleted data is perfectly valid, and much of the data presented by Toddy1, while undoubtedly correct, could be seen as being in addition to your text rather than in place of it. But I would really prefer that the two of you arrive at a friendly editing consensus, please.
Wow. Where on earth did you get this info? I'm no newcomer to battleship writing (see this, but I must have missed a library full of references. Yes, by all means this information should be added to the article. I can't really start work right now, but I believe that an expansion would be just about as useful as a re-write. I highly appreciate your help on this. Buggie111 (talk) 22:03, 16 May 2010 (UTC)
And for your questions, yes, I know what barell droop is, (the rapid firing and form? of guns pushes the barrel a tad down, which, over the long run (meaning time of flight of the shell) moves the line of the shell's path away from the path given by the rangefinder. I've read a tad more about belt armor also, although I knew most about it and the slope given to it by reading, time and again, books on USS Merrimack (1855) and other Confederate ironclads along with other battleship articles here on the wiki. And of your questions purely about the ship, I don't have the references available or in any local library to go and cite them. Buggie111 (talk) 00:14, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Fortunately it is easy to buy reference books over the telephone and the internet. I suggest that you buy some second hand Brassey's Naval Annuals from the late 1880s and early 90s. They are not expensive. I use AJ Simmonds's bookshop - you don't need to go there, you can just phone them.--Toddy1 (talk) 04:27, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
You don't need to buy the old books like Brassey's etc. etc. , most of them have been scanned and put online by organizations like http://www.archive.org and http://www.gutenberg.org ... Many many books for training young officers were being written by experts in the late 1800s and early 1900s and they have a lot of serious detail because the idea of military secracy didn't exist then. Rod Rcbutcher (talk) 14:13, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Re:Standardization
Yep, that works perfectly. We need to have the ranges for the missiles in line with the format used in the gun section so that editors will not complain about it at FAC (or more urgently, GAC, since we need to get at least that far to satisfy FT regulations :) Thanks for the help. TomStar81 (Talk) 02:05, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Your welcome. I was just looking around my watchilst and saw action at WT:OMT, so I came over to check it out. Good luck with it, and I'll try to find references for any of the tagged areas of the article. Buggie111 (talk) 02:07, 17 May 2010 (UTC)
Unfortunately, I don't know an easy way to find what you need. In an ideal world, WP:RUSSIA would be tracking all of its DYKs, but in reality it just ain't so. A possible solution would be to harness this tool—select "Article lists" in the column to the left, enter "Russia" into the "Project" field and 0 into the "Page namespace" field (0 stands for main article space), click the "filter by category" checkbox, and enter "Wikipedia Did you know articles" into the "Talk page category" field. Check "Don't try to compute an overall count" checkbox (it helps speed things up; or at least not abort the query prematurely). Click "Generate list". It takes an awful long time to run, but eventually you'll get a list of all WikiProject Russia's articles which have a DYK banner on the talk page. However, you'll need to review them individually to see which ones would work for the Moscow Portal. Hope this helps at least to some extent! You might also want to ask around at the Village Pump in case someone knows a better solution.—Ëzhiki (Igels Hérissonovich Ïzhakoff-Amursky) • (yo?); May 18, 2010; 20:57 (UTC)
On May 19, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Anson (79), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Mind makeing a FT prep table like the one that Parsecboy has on German BB's? I also see that Franz Ferdinand passed the ARC. Looks like Habsburg and company will fail so how's about me and you get Zrinyi to A-class? I know we can do it as there is alot more on this ship than Habsburg. As for the remaing ships, I'l work on Ersatz Monarch class battleship and you get List of Austro-Hungarian Battleships along with the Viribus Unitis class. sounds OK? I suspect that this summer, we can get this to a Ft or at least a Gt if we try.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up22:00, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey guys, just to note, I had to cut the majority of the EM-class article because I discovered it was a copyvio. Good luck with the Austro-Hungarian BBs! Parsecboy (talk) 22:08, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I'm only 40% done, and I'm waiting on this book to do the Kaiser and Konig classes, as well as get Bayern and Baden ready for FAC—but it doesn't come out until 22 June. Interestingly, perhaps, I stumbled across this, which should be quite handy for that article.
You guys have 9 of the 19 AH articles at GA or higher, which is about 47%, so you'll probably beat me :D Though I did get the first national BC FT :) Parsecboy (talk) 22:22, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah but the list will be killer for Buggie and the "replacement" Monarch class is going to be a bit rocky as well. That also leaves us with THE Tegetthoff class as well as another one.....--White Shadowsyou're breaking up22:32, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, the Ersatz Monarch will be difficult, but you really only have the class article there. I seem to think I came across a book or something about the Tegetthoffs the other day, but can't recall where I saw it. It was probably in Google Books. As for the list, you have a template that's been proven at FLC—Sturm's more or less copied it for the Russian BCs—you might as well too. The main problem there is you have to take it to FL, as there's no "Good List." That ended up taking nearly 2 months from the time I started working on it (though that includes a Milhist ACR). Parsecboy (talk) 22:42, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
There is loads of info for the Ersatz Monarch class but I just do not know where to start! I'll copy your design for the list of AH BB's but the remaining classes will be tough to work on. What makes it even harder is the fact that I habve a grand total of 0 books on the SH navy and I'm not going to the library until...well....when I have the time.--White Shadowsyou're breaking up22:47, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
Apologies, but I will be busy during the summer on vacation, so no go. Good luck though, and I'll try to get to work on the Virbius's soon enough. Buggie111 (talk) 23:57, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
the Greek service doesn't seem to be covered more than trivially in the US pages;
they probably have distinct enough careers to warrant separate pages - I'm not entirely convinced they do, but it deserves discussing;
and, if they should be a single page, it should perhaps be under the Greek title. Whilst they were built by the US, they only served for six years before being sold; after the sale, they served for two or three times as long with the Greek navy, and saw a reasonable amount of combat in WWI and immediately afterwards.
Thoughts? (The latter point has only just occurred to me - it's unconventional for the main career to be with the minor nation's navy after a purchase, but it seems pretty clear in this case.) Shimgray | talk | 19:05, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
Apologies.I was gonna merge into the U.S. pages, but time is somewhat of a constraint. Yeah, Yoenit pointed out the sime things at WT:OMT. I agree with your points above. Happy editing. Buggie111 (talk) 19:10, 21 May 2010 (UTC)
CamrynRocks! (talk) 17:08, 23 May 2010 (UTC)Hey, Buggie111. Thanks for giving me feedback at WHITE SHADOW's page, although my friend and i really don't use Facebook. Thanks anyway, though. If you have any other advice, it would be appreciated. :)
That's nothing. Usually, people reference that as some of their facts. Buggie111 (talk) 17:19, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Encoraçado Riachuelo (1914)
Hello Buggie111. In fact a don't have any information about this ship. A asked another site about the question. I'll write to you if the situation change. Thanks for the good articles your group are writing about batleships. --HTPF 19:03, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, I wrote most of the lead, and, uhhh, ok. Remove my name, and next time, read the instructions at the Review section of the project. Do you think the Karls are ready for a GA? Buggie111 (talk) 23:26, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
You'll need a few more sources IMHO but yeah I guess. You can have all of the Karls and the Tegetthoffs (minus SMS Viribus Unitis since I wrote that one) and I'll get the list. Sound OK?--White Shadowsyou're breaking up23:27, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
Ok. But you can support me at any time, and , as I've reiterrated (did I spell it right) about 9,00 times, you get co-credit for any of those if you fix errors in its review while im away. And what about, say, noming SMS Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand for a FAC? Exactly where would I place and find those sources? I've bust my head open looking for them Buggie111 (talk) 23:30, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
My (our first FA) I think that we are ready for it. Go and submit it to FAC when you feel like it. I'll be there to fix up and issues. (I'll let you have co-nom for my ARC for the list as well)--White Shadowsyou're breaking up23:33, 23 May 2010 (UTC)
I have declined your {{db-person}} on Saad 'Merciless' Wasiuddin because there is a clear assertion of notability. The fact that the assertion is not verifiable through a quick Google search means the article may want to be brought to AfD, but I do not believe it qualifies for speedy deletion. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!!13:43, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
WikiDan, you might have tried a google search; the only hit was the Wiki article itself (and zero for "Jacques Francois" he supposedly won the world title from as well, incidentally). That's a little odd considering he supposedly is a world champion in one of the major martial-art forms. This is an obvious hoax article; I've gone ahead and deleted it. Parsecboy (talk) 13:53, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
A failed Google search is generally a bad reason for a speedy delete. The article made a "credible assertion of notability". Per WP:CSD#A7, "The criterion does not apply to any article that makes any credible claim of significance or importance even if the claim is not supported by a reliable source." The fact that the assertion is false is a fact that can be discussed at an AfD discussion, but a speedy delete should really be reserve for incontrovertible cases. WikiDan61ChatMe!ReadMe!!16:29, 19 May 2010 (UTC)
I didn't delete it under A7, I deleted it under G3. It was an obvious hoax; if the lack of any reference to three books supposedly published in the last year doesn't convince you, try searching for any of the alleged publishers. Furtgers? I don't think so... Parsecboy (talk) 17:44, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
RE: Musashi
Sure thing, possibly even sooner. I finish school on June 11, then have a light two-week exam period (three exams, 14 days, nothing to sweat), so I may consider doing an FAC-run before that. I'm away from my comp July 3-10 and 15-22, so any leadup in that period to an FAC cannot be handled by me. Cam(Chat)05:30, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Your Mother Teresa to those old frigates and obscure hulks of metal. I can work on the Popovs with you if you want. Buggie111 (talk) 20:28, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Heh, thanks. :) I don't have anything on the Popovs to refer to/work from at the moment, but once I can get my hands on the appropriate books through the library I might take you up on that offer. As for GANs - Abdul Kadir might be ready for it, seeing as how obscure she is there can't be too much more that can be reasonably said, I'd think? The Reshadieh class article would need some fleshing out though before going GAN, I'd think. - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed20:31, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Any Ottoman ship article post-1865 is pretty well required to reference the Ottoman Steam Navy, so y'all had better get it from ILL before sending anything to GAN.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 20:34, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
World Warships in Review 1860-1906 by Leather doesn't give anything, but the entire book is British biased, meaning mentionings of pretty obscure ships that really fit the envelope. Buggie111 (talk) 20:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hm, British biased or not you'd think they'd crow about Elswick's work. Ah well! As an aside, there's an article on the ship's namesake on de.wikipedia if anybody feels more paitent with translating - and referencing - than I am. - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed20:52, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Dank could do it. I hate messing with politics, but they, meaning the Elswick guys, might not have been seen very nicely as they were building for a cause different than the one of the Britishh Empire? Buggie111 (talk) 20:54, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Hm, s'possible, I suppose, although back then 'military secrets' were nearly unknown - note the sharing of information on shells and powder that today would be simply inconceivable. BTW, a rough-and-ready start for GB's page is up at the link there, feel free to fiddle/add. :) - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed21:11, 24 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, we'd need to make it bigger. It wouldn't qualify for WP:DYK until it gets to 1500 charcters of readable words. I'll try and work on it. Buggie111 (talk)
I'll be happy to help, but the Garzke & Dulin book they're talking about at OMT is huge and it's needed to save the Featured Topic and other stuff ... and I'm the only guy who has it, so that's going to take a while. While I'm doing that, if you can put your head together with the guys and figure out the one or two books that are going to be most useful for the topics you're interested in in general, that would help ... if they take a while to ship or to arrive through interlibrary loan, I should order them ahead of time. (Watching) - Dank (push to talk) 11:17, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
DYK for List of commanding officers of the USS Oklahoma (BB 37)
Hey, Buggie111! This is a thank-you for starting that article for me. Enjoy the cookie!
CamrynRocks! has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. Spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend. Happy munching!
Spread the goodness of cookies by adding {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!
I see you are interested in this article, which as you are aware, is a subject to a class assignment project. Feel free to offer comments and advice at any point - I am sure the students will appreciate interacting with other editors! --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk 01:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I was reading over the grading and saw that people discussing with other interested others would earn EP< so I decided to be bold and take up that role. I'm sure I could write a great GA on any one of those, but it would all violate WP:OR. Buggie111 (talk) 01:41, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Is Key core country a term that can be referenced? If it is it would interesting to have the chronoligical list of Key countries throughout history. For example United States 1890 to 1973 Britian?? 1889 to 1750 etc etc BTW who became "key core country" after 1973?-- Esemono (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Oklahoma
BTW congrats on the Oklahoma page. 7000+ hits! Not bad. But I was looking on the talk page and that guy has a point about Kenworthy not really being a captain of the ship. If Kenworthy is included then everytime then we would have to add everytime the captain left the ship and put his second-in-charge in command. -- Esemono (talk) 03:54, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Since you have the Turkish ones, can I have a few of the Italian ones? There are a total of 8 seperate classes so how should we divide up the classes, the ships and the list?--White Shadowsyou're breaking up22:32, 25 May 2010 (UTC)
I call Napoli and lower. You can get everything higher and their respective places en list. No one takes Roma. And feel free to push the Turks to GA. Buggie111 (talk) 00:26, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Sure. Impero to FA, with me getting the ability to say that I contributed heavily to it. And then I would have to take Regina Elena class battleship. If it's too much, I can take the otehr Elenas also. They are the bottom amrgin of my Conways ref. Buggie111 (talk) 00:40, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
I only want Sardagena because I've got a book ref on it and think I can expand. You can get the other two Re Umbertos, as I don't really care about them. I can also settle for the Regina Margherita class, but that would be pretty desperate. Buggie111 (talk) 02:01, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Hi Buggie. I was looking over some of the articles you've nominated for GAN, and I think there are some issues with them. Generally speaking, the technical stuff should be on the main class page, with only a short summary on the individual ships (unless the ship had modifications that made it different from the other ships in the class—for instance, compare SMS Hindenburg, SMS Derfflinger, and Derfflinger-class battlecruiser). The individual ship articles should be mostly service history. And I know this is difficult to do with ships like the Austrian battleships, but trust me, there is information out there. Take SMS Brandenburg for example; the only big thing the ship ever did was the expedition to China during the Boxer Rebellion, and even that was uneventful.
I think the problem is that you're trying to do too many articles at once. These obscure ships take a long time to put together properly. In the case of Brandenburg, I created it in 2007, and only got it beaten into fairly decent shape in March of this year. Granted, I only started seriosly improving it on 1 March, but I wasn't finished until the end of the month. Do you see what I mean? It's going to take a while to trawl through things like Google Books to find references to these old, obscure ships. Just for Erzherzog Karl there are 111 hits in GB; not all will be useful (indeed most will not), but to put together a quality article, you have to go through these things with a fine-tooth comb.
OMT isn't a project that will be accomplished in 6 months or even a year. Hell, we've already been working as a project for a year formally, and individually at least twice as long. My suggestion to you is to slow down, take each article one at a time, and compare your articles to those others have written that have already successfully passed GA/A/FA. Parsecboy (talk) 14:36, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I know. I was judging that Karl would follow in the footsteps of Franz Ferdinand. I'll go remove them now. And yes, I know OMT will take a long while. I'll submit at MHAR instead. Buggie111 (talk) 14:39, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I'm with Parsec here. Both you and White Shadows are trying so hard to get GAs out of these articles that you are skipping or overlooking sources and information. Tosa took me eight months to put together while I waited for sources, North Carolina-class battleship took me three months, and even my very first article, USS Nevada (BB-36), took me four months. I can relate with you and WS, however, with Alaska-class cruiser. At the time, I knew little about ships and was merely interested with the topic. Read that article; can you tell? I can. (I've been planning to rewrite that from scratch for awhile now, but haven't gotten around to it yet...) Only extremely experienced editors can crank a GA out in a day or two—and that's not a general rule because I certainly can't.
My advice? Take one, maybe two, battleships that have a decent amount of sources written on them (I'd suggest one of the WWII American battleships.) From here, research your chosen topic—what did the ship do, what battles did she take part it, when was she refitted, etc.; there should be a decent amount of American BB books around. Decide what you want to emphasize and what you think should be summarized. What is important and what isn't? What would be of interest to a general reader, even if it isn't extremely important?
Basically, I don't think you guys can fully handle ships that require such in-depth researching. American BB FAs require a few books and DANFS. Austro-Hungarian BB FAs require you to consult multiple sources all over the board just looking for any mention of the ship. You may be able to squeak by GA, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are good or complete. I strongly, strongly encourage you guys to take up an American BB or two and create fully comprehensive articles on them. I can help you with recommendations for which are the best source if you would like. I'm sure that you will find writing them a much easier task. Regards, —Ed(talk • majestic titan)19:33, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I've been thinking so too. I don't want to make a personal attack here, but I believe WS was edging me on to get them done. Personally, I think I could stcik to American and Russian battleships, but then there's the variety factor for me. My quality of articles has been getting lower, from somthing like, hmmm, Franz Ferdinand (with a lot of support from Parsec) to Moreno, which you are currently performing surgery on, and which I admit was a "Must DYK" job done by me. Hoperfully, over the summer, I'll be able to put together drafts of articles on ym Netbook. Well, I think I should sign off for now. Buggie111 (talk) 19:45, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Yeah, I understand what you mean about variety. That's what spurred me on to do a few other articles away from the German ones (like the AH ships I did, Iron Duke class battleship, Florida class battleship, etc.). The other thing to remember about doing American or British ships (and especially WWII ships) is that there's going to be a lot more info available through Google Books.
The thing to consider is that DYKs are nice and all, but they're not really necessary. And if it's causing you to rush things, then perhaps it's better to avoid trying for them. Or, you could just get all your research done before you even start working on the article (or just work on it in userspace or offline).
And as for feeling pressured to work on articles, remember that this is completely voluntary. I've taken breaks from editing these articles from time to time (I'm sure the rest of us have as well), and they've still been here when I had the time/motivation to continue writing. Everyone works at their own pace; not all of us can crank out DYKs for ships, aircraft, and other miscellaneous pieces of military equipment like Sturmvogel can. Like I said before, I've been working on the German warships for 3 years now and am not even half done yet. Parsecboy (talk) 20:10, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, I'm going to be leaving in a several days, so that should damper my editing. I know this is voluntary, I do this because, during my free time, nothing more interesting can be done. I know this conversation is starting to shift a bit to other things, so I'd like to say that this conversation should slow down. I feel that I've come a long way, from newbie who thought Finish Omt=Big Prize to someone more passive. I'm just not passive enough. I'm going to start reading Red Mutiny. Buggie111 (talk) 20:17, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
One thing I'd suggest that might help, is taking a two-stage approach to editing. When approaching a stub, small Start-class article, or even starting a new article, don't think, "what does this need to get to FA?" or even "...to GA?". Instead, think "what does this need to get to B-class?" and leave it at that. Getting it to B-class should, in most cases, grab a DYK too, I'd think; even if it doesn't, the article will be much improved and reasonably comprehensive, with a minimum of stress involved. Once that's been done, then you can look at what you have, corral the resources you need, and assess where things should go to keep moving up the ladder to infinityGA and beyond. - The BushrangerReturn fireFlank speed20:34, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
I was following that rule when I tackled, more or less, Impero. I knew that I wouldn't take it to GA, I'd just help it be able to be taken to GA. Thanks you all for your kind words, I will heed them over the two months of my absense. Buggie111 (talk) 20:41, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Well, I guess so, and I have done so with Sevastopol, but other attempts have ended in WS barging in with a completed draft in under five seconds. I'll take Netbook. Buggie111 (talk) 21:42, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
Man did I miss alot. I'm not trying to rush though these things. Sorry if I came off like that. But as you can see, I only am working on a about half of the AH BB's and the List for Turkey and Italy, while others have an entire nation that they are working on at the same time while going at the speed of light in editing them. I so try to spend alot of time getting my work all sorted out and I think that I'll stick with my topics for now....--White Shadowsyou're breaking up01:07, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
I cannot force you to do anything you don't want to or don't have the time to do. I was only trying to say that I think that you should get to work on them for my list but i the end I finished it anyway. You don't need to feel rushed. Work at your own pace :)--White Shadowsyou're breaking up10:22, 28 May 2010 (UTC)
Friendly notice:
I noticed that one of the pages you have copy edited points to an article entitled Oath of Office of the President of the United States, which does not appear to be an article. It is probably just a typo, but you should fix it, because you may not get credit for your copy edit if the page doesn't appear to exist. Of course, if it's been deleted, the fact that it doesn't point to anything would make sense. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Quinxorin (talk • contribs) 19:52, 27 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 29, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Reshadieh class battleship, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
I've just penned the big news. On Monday I'll leave a message on the coordinator page inviting the coordinators to make any last second changes before sending the newsletter out. Its also possible I'll come back and write a little more before the letter goes out. Don;t discount more being added until an announcement is made that the letter has been dispatched :) TomStar81 (Talk) 03:37, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
I know. I'm currently dueling with The Bushranger for first place in the contest, so I just had to wonder. See you in July! Buggie111 (talk) 03:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
Italian battleship Andrea Doria (1913)
Hello, you recently expanded the article Italian battleship Andrea Doria (1913) (I'm looking at it because of a reference error on the other article, Andrea Doria class battleship). The expansion talks about a ship named Caio Duilio but doesn't explain why that ship is being discussed on the article for the Andrea Doria. I don't know what your intentions were, so am not about it touch it, would you please revisit and revise? thank you. - Salamurai (talk) 06:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
As the two ships were of the same class, I copied the design section from Caio Duilo, forgetting to paste in Andrea Doria. don't worry, what you saw was just a minor error. Buggie111 (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2010 (UTC)
On May 31, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Italian battleship Impero, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Hi Buggie, I've just assessed the four articles you've sought assessments on at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Requests as stub class. My rationale for doing so is that they provide very little coverage of the ships, and most of their content is generic material available (and presumably taken from) the article on the class. I'd strongly suggest that you slow down and devote more time to the articles you're working on. At present you appear to be aiming to only do the absolute minimum needed to get these articles to B class (presumably as part of the contest you're taking part in) when you could be spending more time on providing more comprehensive and better sourced articles. Nick-D (talk) 11:21, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
That it sank one ship and damaged another in 47 days for a total of 7680 gross register tons? You'll have to think of somthing else if not. Buggie111 (talk) 03:37, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Erzherzog Karl, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Erzherzog Ferdinand Max, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Erzherzog Friedrich, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article ARA Moreno, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On June 1, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article HMS Marlborough (1912), which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
On 2 June, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Golden Cue, which you recently nominated. If you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker.
On June 5, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Colorado State Highway 64, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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 Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LI (May 2010)
The May 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 17:25, 5 June 2010 (UTC)
Almirante Latorre class battleship
Hi there, I was planning on doing this article after I got Latin America: A Naval History, 1810-1987. I may write it even though you've claimed it, if that's okay—if you have any other sources for it that I don't have, could you add the information when you get back? Thanks, —Ed(talk • majestic titan)05:41, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
Heh, didn't see you there. I haven't that many good sources, but I do have a Warship Profile, it's some magazine let out each year back in the 70's, for Eagle. It's chock full of info. Buggie111 (talk) 06:38, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
ISU-152-2
Hi, Buggie.
I just can't find more good data on this variant. It's very rare. I also don't have access to books on this subject. If you could try finding something? Doesn't matter under what designation you'll find the info or on what language. See what you can do. Don't worry if you're not able to find something. It's this variant. It's too rare. Oblivion Lost (talk) 15:24, 31 May 2010 (UTC)
I also missed your post. Hmm, I'll try with some translations, but I don't know how much you can expect. A longer lead may do, and the a GA might be the light at hte end of your tunnel. Buggie111 (talk) 06:40, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
DYK for French battleship Suffren
On June 6, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article French battleship Suffren, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
Can you explain how data from article on the Iéna is applicable to Suffren, an entirely different ship? Aside from gun data there's very little relevant information for Suffren as they differ significantly in armor suite. And what the hell is Caresse, p. 96? His article starts at p. 121. This is pretty shitty history and I'll be trimming much of this improperly sourced material away and downgrading the article.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:20, 6 June 2010 (UTC)
Although I have a draft en route on my Netbook, which might interfere with your draft, I need info on the Petropavlovsk class battleshipSevastopol, launched in 1895. My draft covers her action at the yellow sea, attempts to flee port arthur, and both times when she struck mines. I'd like some more service history though. Buggie111 (talk) 06:36, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Signpost comments
You shoud use yards or feet for American and meters for British and other ships, not the other way around.
Not necessarily so. IMHO you should go with what the sources say. Modern vessels will probably be described in metres, but historic vessels are likely to be described in imperial measurements if there is any connection to the British Empire. Ships built in Europe may well be described in metres. Maybe you might consider altering your comments. Mjroots (talk) 10:24, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
If you need anything...
Just drop a line on my talk page. I took a lengthy wiki-break but now as a Wikipedian I am alive and kicking (though a bit busy IRL because of the exams). Artem Karimov (talk | edits) 13:41, 7 June 2010 (UTC)
Hey, I had a thought the other day I'd like to pass on to you, after seeing your two most recent DYKs. The hooks should probably make clear that the subject article is a battleship (an excellent opportunity to link as well), as most readers won't know that on first look. I did the same thing recently too (like Westfalen, for instance). Just thought I'd let you know. I hope your summer break is going well, I'm still in the middle of finals at OSU. Parsecboy (talk) 20:00, 8 June 2010 (UTC)
For your copyediting efforts during the May 2010 Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive, editing 6 articles with a combined total of 8810 words, I hereby award you this Cleanup Barnstar. Congratulations and thank you for all your hard work! --DiannaaTALK02:49, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
Grab some glory, and a barnstar
Hi, I'd like to invite you to participate in the Guild of Copy Editors July 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. In May, about 30 editors helped remove the {{copyedit}} tag from 1175 articles. The backlog is still over 7500 articles, and extends back to the beginning of 2008! We really need your help to reduce it. Copyediting just a couple articles can qualify you for a barnstar. Serious copyeditors can win prestigious and exclusive rewards. See the event page for more information. And thanks for your consideration. ɳorɑfʈ Talk!14:38, 10 June 2010 (UTC)
The article has been GA Failed despite the best effort of other editors because the questions I ask were not answered in their entirity or not answered all together. Chris (talk) 15:12, 22 June 2010 (UTC)
The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LII (June 2010)
The June 2010 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:43, 6 July 2010 (UTC)
Requests Report - Good news! The number of special requests waiting to be edited has been reduced drastically, with almost all of the remaining items having editors committed to getting them done. Good work, people!
Target Report - ɳorɑfʈ's initial target of reducing the backlog of articles for copy edit turned out to be unrealistic insane, so a new target was set: we hope to reduce the to backlog to less than 7,500 items in the queue by the end of the month. The number in the queue was 7,950 as of close of business yesterday.
If we "concentrate our firepower" we can wipe out Jan, Feb, and March 2008, meaning the drive will have cleared four months off the backlog queue. Please consider copyediting from one of these months.
Rewards Report - We now have some clear leaders on the board in all three Gold Star categories, and many people have qualified for the various barnstars. It is not too late to participate, as it takes just 2,000 words (pre-edit) to qualify for a barnstar! Don't wait! Start participating today. Remember, the ultimate winner is Wikipedia.
Notice to Participants - For those who have indicated that you will be working on certain articles on the drive page in your respective tally box, please ensure that you complete these copyedits as soon as possible.
Thank you very much for your participation so far!
Thanks very much to all who helped with the Guild of Copy EditorsBacklog Elimination Drive. We were very close to meeting our target of 7,500 articles remaining in the backlog. Our most shining success is the incredible reduction in the backlog of Special Requests. That part of the project saw a drop from 62 articles in the queue, some dating back to February of 2009, down to a stunning THREE, all of which were being edited at the close of the drive. The Special Requests page will now be a great resource for people looking to tidy up their article in advance of a GA or FA nomination, instead of a place where articles go to die.
Moving forward
GOCE backlog elimination drive chart up to 31 May
The drive has not only forced a great leap forward in reducing the backlog. It has helped promote the Guild, and led to a greater awareness of the level of vigilance required to keep the backlog manageable. Ideas such as charts, graphs, and barnstars helped motivate editors, and meeting other users helped quell any feelings gnomish editors may have had in the past that they were toiling all alone. Keep up the good work people!!
Stats
Almost everyone who participated will receive a barnstar. We will be handing these out over the next week or so.
Five people will receive the highest award for word count (80,000 or more), the Most Excellent Order of the Caretaker's Star: Bullock, Diannaa, NielsenGW, S Masters, and Torchiest.
The Order of the Superior Scribe (40,000+) goes to Auntieruth55, Bobnorwal, Kojozone, Lfstevens, and Mlpearc.
fds wins the Modern Guild of Copy Editors Barnstar (30,000+).
The Old School League of Copyeditors Barnstar for 20,000+ is awarded to A. Parrot, mono, Truthkeeper88, and The Utahraptor.
the Tireless Conributor Barnstar (12,000+) goes to dtgriffith, Laurinavicius, and Quinxorin.
Buggie111, Brickie, cymru lass, liquidluck, noraft, and Yellow Monkey get the Cleanup Barnstar for 8,000+ words.
The Working Man's Barnstar for 4,000+ words goes to Annalise and fetchcomms.
The Modest Barnstar is awarded to Theo10011 and The Tito.
Gold Star Award
The Gold Star Award goes to the top editor in three challenges: Number of special requests fulfilled, number of articles edited, and number of words. Here are the final results.
Hello! Your submission of Battle of the Arges at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!
GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive inviation
There are currently 0 articles in the backlog. You can help us! Join the September 2010 drive today!
The Guild of Copy-Editors – September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invite you to participate in the September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 September at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 September at 23:59 (UTC). The goals for this drive are to eliminate 2008 from the queue and to reduce the backlog to fewer than 5,000 articles.
Sign-up has already begun at the September drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GoCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
The Wikipedia Guild of Copy-Editors invites you to participate in the November 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive will begin on 1 November at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on 30 November at 23:59 (UTC). The goal for this drive is to reduce the backlog by 10% (approximately 500 articles). We hope to focus our efforts on the oldest three months (January, February, and March 2009) and the newest three months (September, October, and November 2010) of articles in the queue.
Sign-up has already begun at the November drive page, and will be open throughout the drive. If you have any questions or concerns, please leave a message on the drive's talk page.
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants, some of which are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
Hi, busy day...! In your case, it'd be for contributing to Peer Reviews in the past 6 months or so -- search for your name here as a reviewer for examples. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
Reviewer granted
Hello. Your account has been granted the "reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on certain flagged pages. Pending changes, also known as flagged protection, is currently undergoing a two-month trial scheduled to end 15 August 2010.
Reviewers can review edits made by users who are not autoconfirmed to articles placed under pending changes. Pending changes is applied to only a small number of articles, similarly to how semi-protection is applied but in a more controlled way for the trial. The list of articles with pending changes awaiting review is located at Special:OldReviewedPages.
For the guideline on reviewing, see Wikipedia:Reviewing. Being granted reviewer rights doesn't change how you can edit articles even with pending changes. The general help page on pending changes can be found here, and the general policy for the trial can be found here.
Hi, I've noticed that we're 4 days into the drive now, and about 150 articles have been copyedited, but that nobody has checked an article yet... ɳorɑfʈ Talk!01:35, 5 September 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Buggie111. You have new messages at Intelati's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
I declined speedy deletion of this article because this appears to be an actual hospital, and notability was asserted. If you believe the subject is still non-notable, though, please feel free to take the article to WP:AFD. --Metropolitan90(talk)00:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Sorry, I misunderstood. But, as you probably know, the article would need to be expanded significantly to get up to the minimum length to qualify for a DYK, and I don't know who is going to get that done. --Metropolitan90(talk)16:22, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
Wow, I was actually pegging one of the existing coordinators for being the first to break in the candidates section. Seeing a new user there was a surprise, but I like that initiative, its something I value since I believe it speaks to a person's character when they decide to take the lead instead of wait for someone to lead them.
Also, on a personal note, thanks for the Iowa class battleship message; its nice to see that people still care about the article. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
I'm sorry, I don't actually know how to post a slideshow of my cockatiel on YouTube, but I have realized that I am the one at fault here. After having some time to think, I realized that you had every right to remove my edits. It occured to me that maybe peep bowling is unnecessary information. Also, I wanted you to see my new signature! I finally mastered the art of signatures! I actually have intelatl to thank for this signature... --Hyperhippy92The Game14:57, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
To change your delivery options for this newsletter please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 23:01, 7 September 2010 (UTC)
Olympia
Hi,
I was rewritting the last section and we were apparently conflicting. I didn't realize that you were working in that one two.
I'll stand down for a while and let you work. Cheers! Kevin --Kevin Murray (talk) 23:14, 8 September 2010 (UTC)
Hi Buggie111, you've left me a question on my RfA. I just wanted to leave you a note that it's taking me some time answering that question, so in all probability I'll be able to post the answer to the question tomorrow (I'll try to better that too). Thanks for the question; it's quite interesting, even if stolen from Fetchcomms. Regards. ♪ ♫ Wifione ♫ ♪ ―Œ ♣Łeave Ξ мessage♣14:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
Greetings from the Guild of Copy Editors Backlog Elimination Drive!GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Participation report — We have 71 participants in the September drive. 95 people signed up for the July drive, and in May we had 36.
Progress report — We have been making solid progress in eliminating the 2008 articles from the backlog so far. If we continue to focus our firepower we can completely wipe out 2008 from the queue. Overall volumes are lower than expected though, with nearly a thousand articles yet to be done if we are to meet our overall target. If you have not yet participated in the drive, we recommend you do so. If each person who signed up edits one article per day from now till the end of the month we can eliminate another 1,065 articles from the backlog. All contributions are appreciated.
Announcement: credit for 10k+ articles — Participants editing a 10k word article may claim credit for two 5k+ articles on the leaderboard. Those that edit a 15k word article may claim credit for three. Regardless, the article is still counted as a single article in the tallies.
Reminder — Articles from the Requests page can be included in your tally, even if they do not have a copy edit tag. This is a great place to go if you are interested in finding a higher quality article to work on.
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:29, 20 September 2010 (UTC)
Can I claim partial credit for this GA? I know that I did not assist in the GAN itself but I am the 3rd largest contributor to the article and I have over 25 edits to. I helped to write it. I'm asking you first because I don't want to look like a trophy collector who is claiming credit for things that he did not do :)--White ShadowsYour guess is as good as mine16:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
I believe this is because of the Cup. Sure, tkae the credit. You put sweat into the middle patrols when I was busy IRL, so you deserve credit. Buggie111 (talk) 18:52, 25 September 2010 (UTC)
Whoa, I can't believe I missed it's promotion; afterall, I created the article. Thanks to both Buggie and WS for collaborating with me to make this happen. ~NerdyScienceDude23:18, 26 September 2010 (UTC)
ANI Clarification
Much thanks for the clarification... and hoping my response didnt sound snippy - I get kinda "matter of fact" at ANIs, and I always fear my responses may be misunderstood in my attempt to clearly state what I feel. I also notice you like cats :-) I had a catdog cat you probably woulda loved (had to give him away when I moved). He loved to play fetch (taught himself), loved playing, figured out how to open doors, was always there if I was in a bad mood, and tried befriending everything and everyone; including a 160lb rott (the humor of seeing the rott pull down a garbage pail, and Shadow pulling the lid off, followed by the two of them nosing through the pail together was pretty funny to me), a 60lb mutt, and a chinchilla. Wonderful soul he is. ROBERTMFROMLITALK/CNTRB01:54, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
I was trying to explain it in the best way possible. Too bad Shadow had to leave you, seems to have been adorable. I like chihuahuas also, but not as much as those perfect lumps of fur. My house in Russia is crawling with them. Buggie111 (talk) 02:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
Ok, I've changed it back and found out what it ment. What type of admin (trigger happy blocker, passive deleter, etc.) admin would Eagles 247 emulate, not what admin itself. Buggie111 (talk) 13:35, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Adoption request
Hey there, would you be interested in adopting an user? Please see User:Netalarm/Survey#alexandre_rongellion for more details. This user is interested in history, so you two might be able to also work on an article together. Regarding the user's native language being French, I believe we can ask someone listed at Wikipedia:Local_Embassy if translation is needed, so no worries there. Please reply as soon as possible, thanks. Netalarmtalk01:28, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Well, sure. I'd be glad to help someone, And I think I'd be able to use context clues to punch my way through the French. I'll take a look. Buggie111 (talk) 01:29, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Welcome to Assessment with Wikiproject: U.S. public policy
Thank you for assessing with the PPI, assessing with this project will probably be different than assessing with other projects in Wikipedia. It's different because the many of the articles are stub, start, or C class, and we are not working to assess long lists of articles, but will have multiple reviewers assessing the same set of articles. We are looking for Wikipedians who want to take a more in depth look at assessment and help define what is article quality. Please go to the WP:USPP Assessment page to find more details and your assessment page with the first group of articles for you to evaluate. Thanks and happy editing, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 21:47, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
adoption Alexandre Rongellion
Hello, quite pleased of your proposal of adoption. I browsed through your subjects of interest and others, and I was quite attracted by the fact that you do not have a driver's licence and like cats. (Do you know french novelist Cocteau's pun "I prefer cats, because there are no police cats " ?). Anyway, I am pleased to see that you're interested in the Byzantine history and ancient Rome which is quite my hobby nowadays, plus that you are among other of Russian ancestry (hence the interest for Byzance ?). i can see too that you're quite good in computer gimmicks, which I am not. I am currently learning tons of information about ancient history on wikipedia, that are generally not easy to lay a hand on in actual libraries. I think I am a victim of infoglut... Hope I'll learn a few things from you, quite impressed by your medals. One difference though: I loathe computer games, they tend to drive me insane. Bye...--Alexandre Rongellion (talk) 23:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)
Sure, I look forword to working with you. I'm just a bit nervous on getting my lisence, scared that I'll run over a cat or somthing... Anyways, I'll been done setting up the coursework by the 3rd. If you need any help in the meentime, put {{helpme}} on your usertalk page. I'll tell you when I'm done with the lesson setup. Buggie111 (talk) 01:03, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
September 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive Conclusion
GOCE September 2010 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
Greetings from the Guild of Copy EditorsSeptember 2010 Backlog Elimination Drive. Thanks to all who participated! Several of our top editors were called away to real life concerns during the month (be careful out there, people!). This meant that once again, we did not meet all our lofty targets, but we did come close.
Stats
Out of 76 registered editors, 45 actively participated.
We nearly wiped out the 2008 articles from the backlog—there were only 13 remaining when the drive closed.
We reduced the backlog by 725 articles (11.5%), so it was another successful drive.
A total of 59 barnstars will be awarded to 40 editors—well done, and congratulations to all.
Barnstars
If you copy edited at least 4,000 words, you qualify for a barnstar. If you edited in the July 2010 GOCE Backlog Elimination Drive, you may have earned rollover words, which counted towards this month's barnstars (except for the leaderboard awards). Any unused word credits will be held over for the next drive, as long as you participated in the September drive. Over the course of the next week or two, we will be handing out the barnstars. Click here to see a list of barnstar winners.
We will be holding our next drive in November. You can sign up here.
A huge "thank you" to all editors who helped clear the backlog and to others who helped out behind-the-scenes. See you at the next drive, and until then, please continue to help us work through the backlog. Happy editing!
The Russians didn't seem to add it into the book. I've searched all of the pages of it for Sevastopol, and I couldn't find it. Buggie111 (talk) 14:07, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Hmm, have you tried looking it up on Worldcat? They're usually pretty good about figuring that stuff out, even it it's not immediately obvious.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:09, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
Spelling
Hello
whic hthe ywill be, as /i remember there are four ///omt relaed oens in the queue
My Netbook has a midget sized Shift key, that's why there are so many / in it. All of it's keys are tiny, so that's why it's so typo ridden. Buggie111 (talk) 22:49, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
PPI Assessment Follow-up
Hi Buggie111, recently you signed up to help with assessment on Wikiproject: United States Public Policy. This project is probably different than other assessment drives you have worked on, it involves more assessment of lower ranked articles, it has input and staff from the foundation, and specific goals to improve and measure content of public policy articles. It also involves collaboration from some university classes, we are using an experimental assessment rubric, and most articles will be assessed by multiple reviewers to get a range of scores for each article. It's a lot to digest, and totally understandable if it's not what signed up for. However, there are also some exciting perks to this project: 1) your assessments are part of research that is attempting to increase credibility of Wikipedia in academic circles, 2) there is a great group of assessors involved in discussion of what is article quality and how to measure it, 3) WP:USPP is also piloting the Article Feedback tool, so those involved in assessment on the project will be asked to help improve and rate this tool as well, 4) subject matter experts are assessing articles alongside Wikipedians and comparisons of results will provide some insight as to the rigor of Wikipedia quality rating, and 5) other interesting benefits you will find with participation.
The first group of articles requesting your assessment has been posted. I was hoping to do a preliminary comparison of the data on 8 October 2010. The second assessment request, which is part of the same comparison, will go out about the same time. To help with organization, if you haven't posted any assessment scores on your assessment page by 8 October 2010, I will delete your assessment request and you will not receive further requests. I hope the unusualness of this assessment research does not discourage your participation; if you are not interested working in the research I hope you will continue to assess articles within the project. If possible let me know on my talk page if you don't wish to be a part of the research, or perhaps if there was some confusion or bad communication; what the public policy team, and I, in particular, can do to make it more positive for volunteers. Remember, I am new to Wikipedia and trying to learn the best way to research this project, to hopefully integrate the amazing resource that is Wikipedia onto more university campuses and classrooms. Thanks, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 22:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I've copied the lead and characteristics into Ferdinand Max, so I'll get to work on Friedrich and then make a dual-nom.Buggie111 (talk) 00:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
OK then. Are you fine with Franz Ferdinand starting the lineup? Ping me when your one with the Service histories on both Ferdinand max and friedrich. You can nom them if you want. Buggie111 (talk) 00:48, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Both are ready to go. I found a lot of issues in all three articles though. Two were given to France and one to the UK, not the other way around. There were also general issues like punctuation and citations as well as some info that was plain-ol' wrong that I fixed on all three. You may want to look over Friedrich once more to see if it's all true. (look at the other 3 articles to check) mind talking to the guy who reviewed the last few Karl ships if he'll do it for these as well? It may get done faster so we can fix any issues that come up.--White ShadowsYour guess is as good as mine01:11, 11 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi there Buggie111! You may be wondering, what have I done to sound the alarm this time? Nothing. I'm messaging you in regards to the adopt-a-user program, which currently has a backlog of users wishing to be adopted. This doesn't make much sense, as we have a considerable list of users offer adoption, so there shouldn't be any backlog. I've begun to eliminate this backlog myself through a matching program, but I need your help to make it work. Of course, adoptees and adopters don't have to go through there, but I believe it helps eliminate the backlog because someone is actively matching pairs.
On the list of adopters, I have modified the middle column to say "Interests." It's easier working with other users that have similar interests, so if it's not too much to ask, could you add your interests in the middle column? For example, if I was interested in hurricanes, computers, business, and ... reptiles? I would place those in the middle column. Counter-vandalism and the like can also be included (maintenance should be used as the general term). The more interests, the better, since adoptees can learn more about you and choose the one they feel most comfortable working with. The information about when you're most active and other stuff can go into the "Notes" section to the right.
Finally, I've gone around and asked adoptees (and will in the future) to fill in a short survey so adopters can take the initiative and contact users they feel comfortable working with. We all know that most adoptees just place the adopt me template on their user page and leave it - so it's up to us to approach them and offer adoption. So, please take a look at the survey, adopt those that fit your interests, and maybe watchlist it so you can see the interests of adoptees and adopt one that fits your interests in the future.
Once again, thank you for participating in the adopt-a-user program! If you wish to respond to this post, please message me on my talk page.
Buggie111, thanks for contributing to article assessment in WP:USPP. Your continued involvement would be very appreciated. There is a second assessment request posted. There will be weekly updates about the research for this project posted here, look for the first one tomorrow. The next assessment request will come in early November. There is a lot of expertise and discussion about article quality happening in the project, so if you have any thoughts on the metric, or any ideas keeping project research exciting please let me know. ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
Hi Buggie111/Two year archive -- Amy Roth is now out on maternity leave (she had a healthy baby girl this weekend!) so I'll be filling in for a couple of months. (I'm LiAnna Davis, the Public Policy Initiative's communications associate.) I'd like to get the assessments done this week if possible -- I've made some edits to give you direct links to the versions we'd like you to assess. Your page is here. Please let me know if you can't finish it by this weekend! Let me know if you have any questions. Thanks again for all your help! --Ldavis (Public Policy) (talk) 23:39, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
On 21 October 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SMS Budapest, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it 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.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:06, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
Elections are currently underway for our inaugural Guild coordinators. The voting period will run for 14 days: 00:01 UTC, Friday 1 December – 23:59 UTC, Tuesday 14 December. All GOCE members in good standing, as well as past participants of any of the Guild's Backlog elimination drives, are eligible to vote. There are six candidates vying for four positions. The candidate with the highest number of votes will become the Lead Coordinator, therefore, your vote really matters! Cast your vote today.
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on Operation Majestic Titan for a Signpost article to be published this month. 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. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:45, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
I'll root for Green Bay, as a matter of history many Steelers fans did root for Greenbay back when the Steelers were having there long period of down time for rebuilding. I will not root for the patriots though, if they show up in my back yard I'll wave the yellow flag of war :) TomStar81 (Talk) 18:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
Looks like we stand partially divided. at least you don't root for the Cowboys. They're sure taking a beating. As I have relatives in AZ, I hold a grudge against Big Ben and Santanio Holmes. At least he didn't make me angry again Monday. I like Rodgers, just as I like the Ravens and Falcons for Lewwsis and Ryan. But the Cards/Pats are the only teams I really "root" for. See you in the playoffs. Buggie111 (talk) 23:33, 8 December 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I do speak Russian, as well as English and French. One of these days, I am going to build my user page. My current mid-term aim is to get as many articles related to the Siege of Leningrad to B-class or more.D2306 (talk) 15:44, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
I was basing it off of the Fastbuttons buttons that I have. I wwas gonna tag the other page as a hoax, but the comp was too slow. Buggie111 (talk) 01:24, 22 December 2010 (UTC)
We have reached the end of the year, and what a year it has been! The Guild of Copy Editors was full of activity, and we achieved numerous important milestones in 2010. Read all about these in the Guild's 2010 Year-End Report.
Highlights
Membership grows to 503 editors
2,589 articles removed through four Backlog elimination drives
Hey there Buggie. I was thinking, want to get to work on this ship? I've got a bunch of info on her from Sokol and we could probably get her to ACR with Parsec's blessing since he wrote most of her in her current state. So what do you think?--White ShadowsThose Christmas lights02:43, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
Hello, Buggie111/Two year archive! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!
Hello, happy new year and welcome to the 2011 WikiCup! Your submissions' page can be found here and instructions of how to update the page can be found here and on the submissions' page itself. From the submissions' page, a bot will update the main scoresheet. Our rules have been very slightly updated from last year; the full rules can be found here. Please remember that you can only receive points for content on which you have done significant work in 2011; nominations of work from last year and "drive-by" nominations will not be awarded points. Signups are going to remain open through January, so if you know of anyone who would like to take part, please direct them to Wikipedia:WikiCup/2011 signups. The judges can be contacted on the WikiCup talk page, on their respective talk pages, or by email. Other than that, we will be in contact at the end of every month with the newsletter. If you want to stop or start receiving newsletters, please remove your name from or add your name to this list. Good luck! J Milburn and The ed1712:55, 1 January 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through round one of the WikiCup. Signups are now closed, and we have 129 listed competitors, 64 of whom will make it to round two. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round two is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! 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 GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1722:27, 31 January 2011 (UTC)
You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.
So begins round two of the WikiCup! We now have eight pools, each with eight random contestants. This round will continue until the end of April, when the top two of each pool, as well as the next 16 highest scorers of those remaining, will make it to round three. Congratulations to The Bushranger (submissions) (first, with 487 points) and Hurricanehink (submissions) (second, with 459), who stormed the first round. Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to Jarry1250 (submissions) for dealing with all bot work. This year's bot, as well as running smoothly, is doing some very helpful things that last year's did not. Also, thanks to Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.
Some news for those who are interested- March will see a GAN backlog elimination drive, which you are still free to join. Organised by WikiProject Good articles, the drive aims to minimise the GAN backlog and offers prizes to those who help out. Of course, you may well be able to claim WikiCup points for the articles you review as part of the drive. Also ongoing is the Great Backlog Drive, looking to work on clearing all of the backlogs on Wikipedia; again, incentives are offered, and the spirit of friendly competition is alive, while helping the encyclopedia is the ultimate aim. Though unrelated to the WikiCup, these may well be of interest to some of you.
Just a reminder of the rules; if you have done significant work on content this year and it is promoted in this round, you may claim for it. Also, anything that was promoted after the end of round one but before the beginning of round two may be claimed for in round two. Details of the rules can be found on this page. For those interested in statistics, a running total of claims can be seen here, and a very interesting table of that information (along with the highest scorers in each category) can be seen here. 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 GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1723:37, 28 February 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through round two of the WikiCup, which will end on 28 April. Of the 64 current contestants, 32 will make it through to the next round; the two highest in each pool, and the 16 next highest scorers. At the time of writing, our current overall leader is Hurricanehink (submissions) with 231 points, who leads Pool H. Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
A running total of claims can be seen here. However, numerous competitors are yet to score at all- please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. The number of points that will be needed to reach round three is not clear- everyone needs to get their entries in now to guarantee their places! 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 GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1700:53, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
Per your request, I have deleted User:Buggie111/Dwight B. Heard. I wanted to drop a note here, however, because you tagged it with {{db-redirtypo}}, the tag for CSD criterion R3. The page was ineligible for deletion under that criterion. Most redirects created as the result of non-vandalism pagemoves are ineligible. As a user-space request, the better tag would have been WP:CSD#U1. Less potential for confusion that way. Nothing to be done in this case but if you could keep it in mind for the next time, it would help us keep the logs cleaner. Thanks. Rossami(talk)19:30, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Sorry there. I was short on time and the scripts told me to put that in specifically. Next time I'll punch in the correct criterion manually. Buggie111 (talk) 23:02, 8 April 2011 (UTC)
Interesting. What scripts, please? It has been a remarkably common mistake lately. If it's script-driven, that might explain it. And be easy to mass-fix. Rossami(talk)02:06, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Well, not scripts de-jure. After I moved it, it came up saying "If you don't think this is a plausible redirect, click here to mark for CSD". I went there, and it told me to punch db-redirect in.Buggie111 (talk) 02:22, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
Hmmm. Just tested it in the sandbox. That's not going to be an easy page to fix. The wording is poor, though. Thanks for pointing it out. Rossami(talk)
Regarding other CSD nominations:
Saran(iran) - You tagged it as a duplicate of Saran Surname which is was. At that point though, Saran Surname was probably the worse title of the two (since Saran, Iran is where the content finally landed). Complicating the case was the userpage notice. The default for A10 is not as helpful as most people think. The user clearly didn't understand and kept editing. In hindsight, a custom-written explanation might have been more friendly and maybe more effective at sorting out the better title. Right answer in the end, though.
VSide - good tag. It could also have been plausibly tagged with A7 (web) but you already had two solid reasons to delete. Interestingly, that page has been previously deleted many times. A draft has been "userfied" to User:Krispin16/VSide. Don't know how you could have known that, though. And it wouldn't have changed the decision you made.
User:Buggie111/Urartian art - Your final act when you were done with it was to tag the page with G7 which was fair as you were the only editor. You could also have used U1 since it was in your userspace. U1s get executed a bit more cleanly. Worked either way, though.
Kwanhanumas sock - confirmed. Given the user's contribution history, I might have even used the stronger "vandalism" accusation
Kwanhanumas - You tagged it as A7, then reversed yourself. Again, I would have been more harsh and gone straight to "vandalism". You are correct that "blatant hoax" is a very high standard but the link the user stuck at the end confirmed it for me. There was no possibility that link was connected to the alleged content. It was a clear attempt to imply credibility in bad faith.
Lucas Group - restoration of an improperly-removed speedy tag was entirely appropriate. Had the conflict of interest not been so blatant, you might have considered dropping a note on the user's page explaining the error. In this case, I wouldn't have either.
Bisneyland - you tagged it as A7 (no notability) but the content was pretty clearly malicious. Again, I would have been more harsh in the assessment, calling it vandalism. Few would fault you for being tactful, though...
That goes back through November. Is this the level of feedback you were looking for? Rossami(talk) 02:49, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
I'd prefer if ouy'd review any large spurts of action, but besides that, I'm fine. Thanks a lot! Buggie111 (talk) 02:58, 9 April 2011 (UTC)
RE: move request
I'd love to help you out and make that admin move for you, but my RfA doesn't close till the 13th. I'm feeling confident about it, though, and if you can hold off till then, I would love to make it my inagural sysop action. If not, you can find help at WP:Requested moves. bahamut0013wordsdeeds18:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I'll grade the pre-test. You can start working on the first two lessons, in the meanwhile. If you reach the third lesson, which still isn't done, go back to reading the above articles. Buggie111 (talk) 22:54, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Reread the above links until I notify you. Also do the tests for the first two lessons (they are at the bottom). Buggie111 (talk) 01:01, 15 April 2011 (UTC)
Just try not to get mentioned inn E!, then the whole world will be going after you :). Don't worry, this happens frequently, and administrators at WP:AIV can check so as you are not blocked on accident. Buggie111 (talk) 13:22, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
No problem! I was just looking for a DYK to review and decided I didn't want to review some old mill or fungi species. Buggie111 (talk) 13:23, 16 April 2011 (UTC)
On 21 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Dwight B. Heard, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that Dwight B. Heard is credited with making Arizona's cotton industry more competitive after becoming president of the Arizona Cotton Association? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.
Hi, I see you started using one of those new references. Are you sure that all the information you wrote in the 2 paragraphs is stated in the reference? It seems to me that the reference talks more about how hard it was to put on and wear the gas mask, which you don't mention in your article. Best, Yoninah (talk) 14:46, 12 April 2011 (UTC)
Erm... I'm sorry to say this, but the answer is "no." For example, I still can't figure out what is meant by the statement that the mask "compressed" gas -- and there's no information on that topic in the source cited. To be candid, that doesn't make sense. The mask presumably worked by blocking infiltration of the chemical components -- possibly by absorbing them or reacting with them chemically. It doesn't make sense that it could have compressed the gas, nor that compression of gas would have protected the wearer. Also, removing refs to the blog did not improve the sourcing for the article -- it means that more of the article content is now completely unsourced, instead of being sourced to a marginal source. If you ask me, an unreliable source is better than no source at all, because it allows the reader to find out where you got it. --Orlady (talk) 19:49, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I've reverted my older edits and decided that I don't really need to go through this much hassle over a DYK. nothing against you Orlady, but this is like discussing a nbsp at FAC. I think I'm gonna go work on something else. Buggie111 (talk) 20:01, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
K' there, all you template masters, I've got a question. When I was working on my copy of List of Moscow metro stations, a template problem popped up. I copied and pasted over the exact coding from ru.wiki, leaving the title, and everythign seemed ok, but, when I added the english version of the template, it went really cazy. I then found out that the {{}} version of the template was different than if I had just copied over the text from the template. The two templates can be found at User:Buggie111/TemplateSandbox Any help? Buggie111 (talk) 21:25, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
I think I fixed the template, open it up again if it is still an issue, or let me know and I'll look at it some more. Monty84523:00, 22 April 2011 (UTC)
On 26 April 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Caldera Bay, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the sinking of the Blanco Encalada was the first successful attack on a ship by a torpedo boat? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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.
Sub Roman Britain talks about Brtian in the 5th and 6th centries, mine is about the proabilaty of a unifidied post roman kingdom, it was about a state, while sub roman Britain was about an era, please put it back up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raydin687 (talk • contribs) 14:13, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Actually, when I read over the article, it talked about somthing that "started in the 425", otherwise, the fifth century. I'll revert the edit, but be sure to add Wikipedia:Reliable Sources to the article, as right now, it's unsourced. Next time, please put new messages at the bottom. Buggie111 (talk) 17:33, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
The article is mostly theory, its meant to be about the possability of what the Roman Arthur's Kingdom may have been like. Thank you if you put the article back up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Raydin687 (talk • contribs) 21:37, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
It needs to be theory with sources. I'm not putting it back up until you demonstrate some reliable sources that you will use. Please read WP:RS. Buggie111 (talk) 21:49, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
No books or websites? Anyways, I'll revert the redirect and give you a day to cite the article. I'd suggest finding some books also. Buggie111 (talk) 22:53, 26 April 2011 (UTC)
Round 2 of the 2011 WikiCup is over, and the new round will begin on 1 May. Note that any points scored in the interim (that is, for content promoted or reviews completed on 29-30 April) can be claimed in the next round, but please do not start updating your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. Fewer than a quarter of our original contestants remain; 32 enter round 3, and, in two months' time, only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), who led Pool F, was our round champion, with 411 points, while 7 contestants scored between 200 and 300 points. At the other end of the scale, a score of 41 was high enough to reach round 3; more than five times the score required to reach round 2, and competition will no doubt become tighter now we're approaching the later rounds. Those progressing to round 3 were spread fairly evenly across the pools; 4 progressed from each of pools A, B, E and H, while 3 progressed from both pools C and F. Pools D and G were the most successful; each had 5 contestants advancing.
This round saw our first good topic points this year; congratulations to Hurricanehink (submissions) and Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
Sorry this newsletter is going out a little earlier than expected- there is a busy weekend coming up! A running total of claims can be seen here. 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 GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1719:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
On 2 May 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article M2 gas mask, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the M2 gas mask protected the wearer for at least five hours against the common World War I chemical weapon phosgene? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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 Guild of Copy Editors – May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive
The Guild of Copy Editors invite you to participate in the May 2011 Backlog Elimination Drive, a month-long effort to reduce the backlog of articles that require copy-editing. The drive began on May 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on May 31 at 23:59 (UTC). The goals of this backlog elimination drive are to eliminate as many articles as possible from the 2009 backlog and to reduce the overall backlog by 15%. ! NEW ! In an effort to encourage the final elimination of all 2009 articles, we will be tracking them on the leaderboard for this drive.
Awards and barnstars
A range of barnstars will be awarded to active participants. Some are exclusive to GOCE drives. More information on awards can be found on the main drive page.
You are receiving a copy of this newsletter as you are a member of the Guild of Copy Editors, or have participated in one of our drives. If you do not wish to receive future newsletters, please add you name here.
Hey Buggie. Want to help me finish up the remaining issues that we did not fix in this article's ACR? I fixed everything but the citation issue with the notes and one more thing that I cannot seem to put my finger on...I mentioned this over at Dank's TP. (look at his last archive for it)--White ShadowsStuck in square one21:50, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I'm bedded down with finals until the 19th and already have Zrinyi at an ACR, but I'll see if I can take a shot. Buggie111 (talk) 23:58, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
GOCE May 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
So far, 54 people have signed up for the drive, and 33 are actively participating. If you signed up for the drive but have not participated yet, it's not too late! Try to copy edit at least a few articles. Remember, if you have rollover words from the last drive, you will lose them if you do not participate in this drive. If you have not signed up for the drive yet, you can sign up now. If you have questions about getting started, feel free to talk to us. Many thanks to those editors who have been helping out at the Requests page. We currently have 17 articles awaiting edit.
Progress report
We are making slow progress on achieving our target of reducing the overall backlog by 15%; in order to accomplish this goal we will need to complete about 400 more articles. However, we are making good progress on the 2009 backlog, as we have eliminated over half of the articles from 2009 that were present at the start of the drive. Let's concentrate our fire power on the remaining months from 2009; leaderboard awards will be handed out for 2009 articles this drive. Thank you for participating in the May 2011 drive. We hope it will be another success!
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:59, 17 May 2011 (UTC)
We're half way through round 3 of the 2011 WikiCup. There are currently 32 remaining in the competition, but only 16 will progress to our penultimate round. Casliber (submissions), of pool D, is our overall leader with nearly 200 points, while pools A, B and C are led by Racepacket (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.
A running total of claims can be seen here. 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 GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1723:22, 31 May 2011 (UTC)
May MilHist contest
Hi mate, looks to me like your two entries haven't advanced this month -- rather than score them zero this month, are you happy for me to just spirit them into next month's table? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:03, 1 June 2011 (UTC)
GOCE May 2011 backlog elimination drive progress graphs
There were 63 signups for the drive; of these, 45 participated. Although we did not award a bonus for articles from the Requests page this drive, we are not experiencing lengthy delays in getting the articles processed. Many thanks to editors who have been helping out at the Requests page and by copy editing articles from the backlog.
Progress report
During the month of May we reduced the backlog by approximately 10%, and made remarkable progress on eliminating articles tagged from 2009. There are now only 15 articles left, down from the 415 that were present when the drive started. Since our backlog drives began in May 2010 with 8,323 articles, we have cleared more than 54% of the backlog. A complete list of results and barnstars awarded can be found here. Barnstars will be distributed over the next week. If you enjoyed participating in our event, you may also like to join the Wikification drives, which are held on alternate months to our drives. Their June drive has started.
Coodinator election
The six-month term for our first tranche of Guild coordinators will be expiring at the end of June. We will be accepting nominations for the second tranche of coordinators, who will also serve a six-month term. Nominations will open starting on June 5. For complete information, please have a look at the election page.
To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:12, 4 June 2011 (UTC)
We are half way through 2011, and entering the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; the semi-finals are upon us! Points scored in the interim (29/30 June) may be counted towards next round, but please do not update your submissions' pages until the next round has begun. 16 contestants remain, and all have shown dedication to the project to reach this far. Our round leader was Casliber (submissions) who, among other things, successfully passed three articles through featured article candidates and claimed an impressive 29 articles at Did You Know, scoring 555 points. Casliber led pool D. Pool A was led by Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by Hurricanehink (submissions), who claimed for, among other things, three featured articles and five good articles. In addition to the four pool leaders, 12 others (the four second places, and the 8 next highest overall) make up our final 16. The lowest scorer who reached round 4 scored 76 points; a significant increase on the 41 needed to reach round 3. Eight of our semi-finalists scored at least twice as much as this.
No points were awarded this round for featured pictures, good topics or In the News, and no points have been awarded in the whole competition for featured topics, featured portals or featured sounds. Instead, the highest percentage of points has come from good articles. Featured articles, despite their high point cost, are low in number, and so, overall, share a comparable number of points with Did You Know, which are high in number but low in cost. A comparatively small but still considerable number of points come from featured lists and good article reviews, rounding out this round's overall scores.
We would again like to thank Jarry1250 (submissions) and Stone (submissions) for invaluable background work, as well as all of those helping to provide reviews for the articles listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Please do keep using it, and please do help by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup.
Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here, for those interested, though it appears that neither are completely accurate at this time. 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1723:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
The latest GOCE backlog elimination drive is under way! It began on 1 July and so far 18 people have signed up to help us reduce the number of articles in need of copyediting.
This drive will give a 50% bonus for articles edited from the GOCE requests page. Although we have cleared the backlog of 2009 articles there are still 3,935 articles needing copyediting and any help, no matter how small, would be appreciated.
We are appealing to all GOCE members, and any other editors who wish to participate, to come and help us reduce the number of articles needing copyediting, as well as the backlog of requests. If you have not signed up yet, why not take a look at the current signatories and help us by adding your name and copyediting a few articles. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words".
We are half way through the penultimate round of this year's WikiCup; there is less than a month to go before we have our final 8. Our pool leaders are Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from Casliber (submissions)) and two featured lists (Hugo Award for Best Graphic Story, from PresN and Grammy Award for Best Native American Music Album, from Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!
There is little else to be said beyond the usual. Please list anything you need reviewing on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews, so others following the WikiCup can help, and please do help if you can by providing reviews for the articles listed there. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews generally at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup- points are, of course, offered for reviews at GAC. Two final notes: Firstly, please remember to state your participation in the WikiCup when nominating articles at FAC. Finally, some WikiCup-related statistics can be seen here and here. 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 receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1711:23, 1 August 2011 (UTC)
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their September 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy editing backlog. The drive will begin on September 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and will end on September 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles in the backlog, as we want to copy edit as many of those as possible. Please consider copy editing an article that was tagged in 2010. Barnstars will be given to anyone who edits more than 4,000 words, with special awards for the top 5 in the categories "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". See you at the drive! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:
Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.
In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk·contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.
A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1723:53, 31 August 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
The person who removed Jeff Wooten as Ironwood vice principal added him to the Raymond S. Kellis High article. You might want to check if something happened there. Raymie (t • c) 22:10, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for reviewing the article VI Corps (Grande Armée) as B-class and your kind comment. I'd appreciate if you could mark up the talk page. I did that "corps" article on a whim and wasn't planning to do all of them. (I'd look at your Caldera Bay article but it's late.) Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 04:04, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Deutscher Wikipedia Beitrag auch in der englischen Wikipedia veröffentlichen
Hi Buggie111!
Ich möchte gerne meinen Beitrag von der deutschen Wikipedia auch in der englischen Wikipedia veröffentlichen. Dazu würde ich Hilfe benötigen.
Könnte ich dich bitte über E-Mail kontaktieren, um dir Details bekannt zu geben?
Thanks for your answer. I would like to publicise my article from the German Wikipedia also in the English Wikipedia. The article is about a company. Would it be possible to contact you by Mail for further details?
Sure, just click the Email this USer button on hte left hand side of the screen.. Although I don't know why you can't do it here........... Also, are you by any chance User:Bah? Just makin' sure. Buggie111 (talk) 13:37, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
That was quick!
The "I got there 11 minutes after voting opened" award
Sorry, I didn't read your message on Cerejota's talk, I thought it was sarcasm from a supposedly vandal only account, although it was reported due to Cerejota's revert. Sorry about that. But, could you eplease remove the part about swear words, nowhere were htey used, and please try to calm your edit summaries down in the future, I have not been warned by you in the pat for refactoring other's edits, as I remember, the last time was in March of 2010. cheers, Buggie111 (talk) 02:40, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
The previous warning to which I refer is here, where I undid the edit you had made to Mkativerata's nomination statement. As best I can tell, you did not ask either Mkativerata or the candidate before you bowdlerized his statement. Editing others' comments in this way, as you did to Ironholds' comment here, is unacceptable, and I ask again: do you understand? 28bytes (talk) 02:48, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Oh, I thought you meant the goodbye sweet prince part. I actually, personally, don't know how those two reverts occured. I didn't take a look at the nom statement or comments and am sorry about that. Must be my filter rewriting the stuff. Apologies once again. Buggie111 (talk) 03:25, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Actually, turned off one two of three computers. The alst one is password protected (and it's a very long process of getting the password), so I"ll ahve to use IE on that computer. Nothing bad, though, the FF spell check seems ot be down on it. Buggie111 (talk) 01:19, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Ok, I'll give you another hour, but it's still not notable. Please see this for further info. On the topic of Military History, the thign hanging at the top of my page is old stuff. I'd suggest you look at this for some tasks. Once again, welcome! Buggie111 (talk) 23:47, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
Nah never mind go ahead and delete the page. I read why and I think it might be a waste of time and nothing somebody will look at. Thanks for being the first person to welcome me.Gatorfan6 (talk) 23:53, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
How about we both don't take offense? However if you want run to an admin, it is free and available. I'm not interested in controlling anything beyond not having to copy write it endlessly. Secondly the article is getting over long. Thirdly sometimes you really don't have a choice but to go to a website, unfortunately. Fourthly, we have both offered to help this fellow out with a few copy writes to help him out. There have been lots of edits to the Battle of Borodino and for the most part I let them be, just as every editor out here does. That being said there are a few of us that try out best to keep the article on the beam more or less. We have lots of folks that would rewrite this to something that better suites their personal tastes. See all the fun that has been had with the results box for one. Websites have been used to replace cited content from RS sources, usually as a means of changing the results of the battle or rewording the article for the same reason. Now actually I am an American so I don't really care who won except for the glaring fact that we are presenting a history to the public and it is supposed to be the truth, or at least as close as we can get.
This fellow has done nothing wrong besides a fair amount of bad grammar. As for sources, actually in this case it would be better to use a recent history from a main stream author mainly because the farther back you get the more distorted the truth becomes. Chandler was quite the Napoleonic Scholar and managed to blow it several times. Asking a new Editor to sort out the good from the bad is asking a bit much.
Now as for the reason I probably sounded a bit harsh?
I know the rules here, so do you, lets both assume we intend on following the letter and spirit of the intent.
As I told Alex, the problem is that new editors tend to go to the articles where the bar is set very high. They get reverted and frustrated and quit. It grates on my nerves and isn’t my forte but if we don’t help the new Editors out we are never going to get really good new editors. I intend on helping him out. God knows there are precious few that really want to work on the Russian articles as is and I need every one I can get.
I hope that explains where I am at. We are both trying to help him and there are lots of articles that any Russian speaker can do and frankly that I can’t. I can’t get decent sources.Tirronan (talk) 05:34, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!
Discussions of our plans for the coming year will no doubt begin in the next few days. In the meantime, please make sure that you have the coordinators' discussion page on your watchlist, as most of the relevant activity happens there. If you have not already done so, you may want to read the relevant courses in the project academy, as well as the discussion page and its recent archives.
Looks like we've just made it with only 19 votes for Coordinators. Hope to work with you as Coordinator over coming months! AustralianRupert, who I have struck up an online wikipedia friendship gave his support for us and he's very helpful when he can get access Wikipedia. Adamdaley (talk) 05:11, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Coordinator of the Military history Project, September 2010-September 2011
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy (talk) 22:04, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by Miyagawa (submissions), Hurricanehink (submissions) and Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.
If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, 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, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed1712:29, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Talk Back
Hello, Buggie111. You have new messages at Karl 334's talk page. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
00:21, 2 October 2011 (UTC)(Timestamp added due to lack of one.)
Thanks Buggie111 for the Military History Reviewers' Award. I enjoy doing research and editing on Wikipedia. I believe the study of military history has tremendous value and importance for posterity. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:49, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
"Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jul-Sep 2011"
Thanks. However, mine doesn't display correctly but I can't identify a succinct fault; this may affect others. Grandiose(me, talk, contribs) 16:39, 1 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks so much for The Military history reviewers' award - I doubt I did enough to deserve it, but thanks you for the recognition. Ruhrfisch><>°°03:00, 2 October 2011 (UTC)
I also re-read the article itself, and believe it meets the "good article" requirements. You may sense a sales pitch at some places, but that is inevitable given that the tool's raison d'etre is that it simplifies -- almost trivializes -- what was hitherto a complex process requiring advanced knowledge and skills. For example, to test a parser, you can achieve by clicking a button what other tools (e.g. JavaCC, ANTLR, etc.) can accomplish only after a tedious three-step (generate parser, compile, run parser) manual process.
If you have any other observations I'll be happy to address them.
Since I'm not a computer expert, I suggest you move the page and ask at WP:PR, or possibly at one of the wikiproejct here. I'd add more content, but, then again, I don't know if there's any to be added. The lead of the artilce is longer than the article itself, which shouldn't usually be done. Buggie111 (talk) 19:00, 6 October 2011 (UTC)
self-reviews for B-class
Buggie, please don't self-assess articles that you've worked on for B-class. Please let the people at WP:MHAR do so as they're neutral parties. Personally, I'd say that the Condorcet article is only C-class because it doesn't cover her activities during the war in any significant detail.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:27, 8 October 2011 (UTC)
Umm, yeah, I did. Kind of busy now, so I"d suggest you start on the categories, dyk's, etc. using the portal skeleton. I"ll finish up the American football portal in the meantime. Buggie111 (talk) 01:29, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
What colors would you suggest using? I thought a toned down red for the title background and black for the text would be appropriate. Yellow should also appear somewhere, and maybe white (reminiscent of Nazi Germany and the Holy Roman Empire's war flag). WikiCopter22:58, 9 October 2011 (UTC)
I'm done for the day. I finished off the first five selected articles and biographies. It would be nice if you did the DYKs and maybe the selected pics... WikiCopter03:13, 10 October 2011 (UTC)
Different users are using this IP. I left the message about the German cruiser Admiral Graf Spee on User talk:Parsecboy page. But I did NOT do the DASH thing. That was somebody else using this IP. Oh, well, that other user won't know that they have a message. 209.86.226.61 (talk) 04:12, 13 October 2011 (UTC)
Thankyou for participating in my request for adminship. Now I've got lots of extra buttons to try and avoid pressing by mistake... Redrose64 (talk) 16:15, 14 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks! Add categories, probably fix up the assessment page, review it at DYK and remove the needs review tempalte on the article. Thanks again, Buggie111 (talk) 18:10, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Short form references
Hi, Buggie111. I happened to notice in my travels that you have been using {{sfn}} tags to organise your citations. It's a great tool, isn't it? You might be interested in installing a script: importScript('User:Ucucha/HarvErrors.js'); which detects Harvard citation errors, such as templating a reference that does not appear in the bibliography, or including a source in the bibliography that is not actually cited in the article. Not sure where I heard about it, but it's a great tool.
Also, if you like flatlist, you will love its counterpart, {{ubl}} (unbulleted list). This template can be used in info boxes and other places where lists are required. The advantages are cleaner mark-up, and an easier time parsing the text by screen readers for the vision impaired. Break-tags actually create tiny paragraphs, semantically incorrect. I have done an example at Japanese battleship Tango. Regards, -- Dianna (talk) 04:26, 18 October 2011 (UTC)
It was my first. My memory engrams clearly tell me that I corrected the text (you can even see that the number of days and threads were changed from the original), but the lack of proof in the article history suggests that my memory may have been altered to conceal something terribly sinister.
Hello Buggie111/Two year archive! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.
If this invitation also appears on other accounts you may have, please complete the survey once only.
If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.
Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.
You are receiving this invitation because you have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey
Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Battle of Caldera Bay you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 14 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Military history of the Russian Empire
Thanks for taking up the PR. Forgot to mention: how do you think I should split up the completed topic? Right now I'm leaning towards Peter the Great to Peter II, then Catherine the Great to Napoleon or thereabouts. Won't get back to writing new info until I pull some books out of the library tomorrow. =) ResMar00:57, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I've read it before (can't remember how it got to it) but it never hurts to read it again. Very sad, pity that PTSd should take him with everything that he promised. Buggie111 (talk) 03:39, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
The Guild of Copy Editors invites you to participate in their November 2011 Backlog elimination drive, a month-long effort to reduce the size of the copy edit backlog. The drive begins on November 1 at 00:00 (UTC) and ends on November 30 at 23:59 (UTC). We will be tracking the number of 2010 articles (and specifically will be targeting the oldest three months), as we want to copy edit as many of these as possible. Barnstars will be awarded to anyone who copy edits more than 4,000 words, and special awards will be given to the top 5 in the following categories: "Number of articles", "Number of words", and "Number of articles of over 5,000 words". We hope to see you there! – Your drive coordinators: Diannaa, Chaosdruid, The Utahraptor, Slon02, and SMasters.
Hi there, Buggie. I recall seeing you drop a {{ygm}} template off at Reaper Eternal's talk page earlier this month. I was just wondering, did you ever received a reply to that email? SwarmX17:43, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
Er...well yes. There is. To me, personally, at least. After nearly a year of highly active editing (and shortly after becoming an admin), he suddenly and without any warning just stopped. I was just wondering if anyone had heard anything from him since then (I sent him an email a while back and didn't get a reply). SwarmX18:29, 29 October 2011 (UTC)
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on the Bugle for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to WikiProject Military History. 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. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:49, 30 October 2011 (UTC)
On 31 October 2011, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Day of Seven Billion, which you created or substantially expanded. The fact was ... that the United Nations Population Fund has designated today as the Day of Seven Billion? You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check) and add it 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 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is Hurricanehink (submissions), who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009) and Sturmvogel_66 (2010). The final standings were as follows:
Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.
The Featured List Award: Miyagawa (submissions), for his performance in round 4. PresN (submissions) matched the score, but Miyagawa won the tiebreaker.
The Recognised Topic Award (for good and featured topics): PresN (submissions), for his performance in round 3.
The Reviewer Award (for good article reviews): Wizardman (submissions), for his performance in round 3.
No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.
Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed1700:33, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello Buggie111. Thanks for patrolling new pages – it's a very important task! I'm just letting you know however, regarding Peter Shatner (actor, author, producer), that tagging articles for speedy deletion moments after creation as lacking context (CSD A1), content (CSD A3) and articles created through the Article Wizard, is too fast. It's best to wait at least 10 - 15 minutes for more content to be added, and the articles should not be marked as patrolled. Attack pages (G10), blatant nonsense (G1), pure vandalism (G3), and copyright violations (G12) should of course be tagged and deleted immediately. Thanks.
Στc.03:09, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
Srry. Laptop battery was getting low, so I'd have had to find it in my watchlist when I got home. I believe it would have been A7'd if it lasted any longer. Should I remove? Buggie111 (talk) 03:14, 2 November 2011 (UTC)
2011 WikiCup participation
Awarded to Buggie111 for participation in the 2011 WikiCup.
Thanks for the pointer. My status was to be something I updated, but I got lazy and sidetracked. Now it serves no more than a mention of if I might be able to get to the computer within 24 hours of your post. I've thought about deleting it. RL's a bit too much to handle for me know, so I'll start your review on Friday after my surgery. Buggie111 (talk) 01:29, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I've added a little more since the last time you edited, incidentally; you may want to take another look. As always though, thanks for the help :) TomStar81 (Talk) 06:51, 9 November 2011 (UTC)
I understand that an official welcome message was overlooked upon approval of your application to join the Global Education Program as an Online Ambassador. My apologies. Welcome just the same! The steps you need to take now, a few things you need to read, are bolded.
When you get a chance, please add your username to the official list of Online Ambassadors and add a profile for yourself here (which helps match Online Ambassadors with classes in their areas of interest).
Here are some things you should know to help you get started:
The role of the Online Ambassador
The main role of for an Online Ambassador is to join the "pod" for one or more participating classes. The pod is the team of people helping a class of students contribute effectively to Wikipedia, consisting of the course instructor, the local Campus Ambassadors who will work with the class in person, the Online Ambassadors who work with the class online, and the Regional Ambassador for the pod who will check in periodically with the pod to make sure everything is going well.
A prototypical pod might look something like this:
An instructor who is fairly new to Wikipedia, leading a class of 20 students assigned to make significant contributions to new or existing articles related to the course subject.
Two Campus Ambassadors, one of whom is an experienced Wikipedian and one of whom is new to Wikipedia. The Campus Ambassadors will have gone through a training program on the basics of Wikipedia and how to help students contribute effectively.
Two Online Ambassadors, one moderately experienced on Wikipedia and one very experienced, who can answer basic questions and give good editing advice and find others to help when they get in over their heads, one of whom has a particular interest in the subject area of the course.
One Regional Ambassador, a moderately experienced Wikipedian who is working with 15 different pods spread across a big geographical region.
(That's an idealization, but it gives you an idea of the spectrum of people in each of the roles in the program.)
The expections for an Online Ambassador in a pod (and what you can expect from other pod members) are laid out in the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between pod members. In short the role of the Online Ambassador is to:
Help students in your class(es) when they ask for it, answer their questions, and generally watch out for them
Help students to get feedback on their work (whether from you or other editors an interest in / knowledge of the subject area)
Be a good example for students, modeling good wiki communication and editing practices
Communicate regularly with the other members of your pod about how things are going and problems are coming up
To join a pod, go to the MOU signup page, which lists the courses for the current term, and leave your signature in one of the Online Ambassador slots for the pod you want to join.
You can also help as an Online Ambassador outside of your role as a pod member, anywhere you see students who could use help. Feedback on the substance (rather than style and formatting) of student articles, in particular, is always a need.
If you use IRC, please consider adding #wikipedia-en-ambassadors and #wikipedia-en-classroom to your channel lineup. The latter is the main help channel for the program, where students and instructors come from time to time in search of live help.
The Ambassador Program announcements list, which all ambassadors should join. It is a low-traffic email list that is only used for significant announcement that are relevant to the whole program. Please sign up as soon as you get a chance.
The Wikipedia Ambassadors Google Group, a discussion list shared by Online Ambassadors and Campus Ambassadors. It's not required, but it's strong recommended and most of the ambassadors are on it. Request to join the Wikipedia Ambassadors Google Group if you would like access.
Newsletters about the program, or messages for Online Ambassadors particularly, may be delivered to your talk page on occasion.
Thanks for volunteering as a Wikipedia Ambassador! If you have any questions, please let me know.
We are currently running a study on the effects of adding additional information to SuggestBot’s recommendations. Participation in the study is voluntary. Should you wish to not participate in the study, or have questions or concerns, you can find contact information in the consent information sheet.
We have added information about the opportunity to make substantial valuable contributions to an article using a Low/Medium/High scale which goes from Low to High . The score is calculated by combining an article's readership and quality.
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly, your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!
Ummm, I did. Didn't find anything. Probably that's the same reason why I get marked off for spelling on my papers, guess I just can't find it. Plus, it's only a PR, not some dire-urgent FAC. Buggie111 (talk) 03:29, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Wait so no problems, then? Hmm. Ok. That's good, I should be able to punch it through A without that much effort, then. ResMar03:43, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Hello. In case you didn't know, when you add content to talk pages and Wikipedia pages that have open discussion, you should sign your posts by typing four tildes ( ~~~~ ) at the end of your comment. You may also click on the signature button 
located above the edit window. This will automatically insert a signature with your username or IP address and the time you posted the comment. This information is useful because other editors will be able to tell who said what, and when. Thank you. --SineBot (talk) 17:30, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
Hello! Your submission of Moscow Monorail Transit System at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Intelligentsium 01:09, 20 January 2010 (UTC)
Responded.
Buggie111 (talk) 01:27, 21 January 2010 (UTC)
If you require any further assistance, please join the editors on IRC by clicking here. Please insure you join the "#wikipedia-en-help." This is the default channel. Mikemoral♪♫ 00:12, 13 March 2010 (UTC)
Thank you for your support MisterBee1966 (talk) 14:53, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Hurricane Douglas (2002) for things which need to be addressed. S Masters (talk) 08:39, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
The Bushranger (submissions), who, at the time of writing, has a comfortable lead with 228 points, followed by 
Hurricanehink (submissions), with 144 points. Four others have over 100 points. Congratulations also go to 
Yellow Evan (submissions), who scored the first points in the competition, claiming for Talk:Hurricane King/GA1, 
Miyagawa (submissions), who scored the first non-review points in the competition, claiming for Dognapping, and 
Jarry1250 (submissions) who was the first in the competition to use our new "multiplier" mechanic (explanation), claiming for Grigory Potemkin, a subject covered on numerous Wikipedias. Thanks must also go to Jarry1250 for dealing with all bot work- without you, the competition wouldn't be happening!
Casliber (submissions) finished third with 223. Twelve others finished with over 100 points- well done to all of you! The final standings in round one can be seen here. A mere 8 points were required to reach round two; competition will no doubt be much more fierce this round, so be ready for a challenge! A special thanks goes, again, to 
Stone (submissions) for some helpful behind-the-scenes updating and number crunching.
Piotrus (submissions) (Pool G) also has over 200 points, while 9 others (three of whom are in Pool D) have over 100 points. Remember that certain content (specifically, articles/portals included in at least 20 Wikipedias as of 31 December 2010 or articles which are considered "vital") is worth double points if promoted to good or featured status, or if it appears on the main page in the Did You Know column. There were some articles last round which were eligible for double points, but which were not claimed for. For more details, see Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring.
Nergaal (submissions) who also led pool H and pool B respectively. However, there remain content types for which no points have yet been scored; featured sounds, featured portals and featured topics. In addition to prizes for leaderboard positions, the WikiCup awards other prizes; for instance, last year, a prize was awarded to 
Candlewicke (submissions) (who has been eliminated) for his work on In The News. For this reason, working on more unusual content could be even more rewarding than usual!
Racepacket (submissions), 
Canada Hky (submissions) respectively. The score required to reach the next round is 35, though this will no doubt go up significantly as the round progresses. We have a good number of high scorers, but also a considerable number who are yet to score. Please remember to submit content soon after it is promoted, so that the judges are able to review entries. Also, an important note concerning nominations at featured article candidates: if you are nominating content for which you intend to claim WikiCup points, please make this clear in the nomination statement so that the FAC director and his delegates are aware of the fact.
Wizardman (submissions), claiming points for a featured article, a featured list and seven good article reviews, while pool C was led by 
Eisfbnore (submissions), who claimed for two good articles, ten articles at Did You Know and four good article reviews. They scored 154 and 118 respectively. Pool B was by far our most competitive pool; six of the eight competitors made it through to round 4, with all of them scoring over 100 points. The pool was led by 
Adabow (submissions) (Pool A, 189 points) and 
PresN (submissions) (Pool B, 165 points). The number of points required to reach the next round is not clear at this time; there are some users who still do not have any recorded points. Please remember to update your submissions' pages promptly. In addition, congratulations to PresN, who scored the first featured topic points in the competition for his work on Thatgamecompany related articles. Most points this round generally have, so far, come from good articles, with only one featured article (White-bellied Sea Eagle, from 
Another Believer (submissions)). Points for Did You Know and good article reviews round out the scoring. No points have been awarded for In the News, good topics or featured pictures this round, and no points for featured sounds or portals have been awarded in the entire competition. On an unrelated note, preparation will be beginning soon for next year's WikiCup- watch this space!
Casliber (submissions), Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
PresN (submissions), Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
Hurricanehink (submissions), Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
Wizardman (submissions), Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
Miyagawa (submissions), the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
Resolute (submissions), the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
Yellow Evan (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
Sp33dyphil (submissions), who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.
MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.
to High 
Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.
This process may take up to 14 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:45, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
The Bushranger (submissions), for his performance in round 1.
Candlewicke (submissions), for his performance in round 1.
