User talk:Dank

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Please leave a message, and I'll reply here.
Copyediting GANs Library Links Milhist Alerts Policy update RFA RFCs Scripts Shiny things
My talk page is watched by friendly talk page stalkers. Their input is welcome and their help with messages that I cannot reply to quickly is appreciated.
Material in the New Orleans city archives.jpg

(2007-4/08), (5-7/08), (8-11/08)
(12/08-2/09), Mar, Apr, May, Jun
Jul/Aug 2009 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2010 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun
Jul/Aug 2010 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2011 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun
Jul/Aug 2011 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2012 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun
Jul/Aug 2012 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2013 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun
Jul/Aug 2013 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2014 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun
Jul/Aug 2014 - Sep/Oct - Nov/Dec
Jan/Feb 2015 - Mar/Apr - May/Jun


Thank you for commenting Kronan FAC. I really appreciate all the helpful pointers.

Peter Isotalo 16:37, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. - Dank (push to talk) 16:39, 4 June 2014 (UTC)


Dank: I hate to put you on the spot, but I do need a bit of advice. If you feel uncomfortable in giving it, I’ll understand. Question: Say a reviewer’s comments introduce material that needs further clarification as one sees it, how candid should one be regarding the response to the things said? Especially when the reviewer has informed you upfront your work is not up to speed. In any event, thank you. Pendright (talk) 23:18, 4 June 2014 (UTC)

I asked for help at the FAC page for you. - Dank (push to talk) 00:36, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
Somehow our wires got crossed, but thank you for your efforts. My post in response to yours follows. Pendright (talk) 02:13, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Dank apparently misunderstood my post, I am willing and able to respond and I intend to do so myself. Pendright (talk) 01:47, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. - Dank (push to talk) 02:17, 5 June 2014 (UTC)
From FAC page: No problem! Ordinarily, I’d accept all the help I could get. In this case, I think it’s my responsibility to make an effort to address all the questions put to me by the reviewers. If I get stuck, I’ll yell! Sorry for this little episode. Pendright (talk) 07:33, 5 June 2014 (UTC) Pendright (talk) 07:45, 5 June 2014 (UTC)

Quick question for you in your copyediting role.[edit]

I just got challenged about using capitalization when referring to a specific turret, forex No. 3 Turret. I believe that since I'm referring to a named thing, it's therefore a proper noun. Am I correct? I'm waffling right now as I've seen plenty of British mentions of 'X' turret, etc., so I think it's time for a second opinion.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:31, 6 June 2014 (UTC)

Opinions on capitalization and punctuation tend to vary a lot. I'm not aware of anything I could look up that would settle this one, one way or the other. From a practical standpoint, if you can live with what the reviewer wants, go with that. - Dank (push to talk) 16:00, 6 June 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for your quick response.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:18, 6 June 2014 (UTC)


Thanks for your FAC help. Am I running out of time? I have most of the remaining items pretty well scoped out, and should be done with them in a day or two. Thanks again! Pendright (talk) 03:03, 9 June 2014 (UTC)

Nope, you're fine. - Dank (push to talk) 03:11, 9 June 2014 (UTC)


Is there a reason why The Mahan-class destroyer article is still shown as a GA? Pendright (talk) 22:56, 12 June 2014 (UTC)

A-class is a wikiproject-level review, and wikiprojects have broad discretion, so it doesn't show up on the article page. It does show up on the talk page. - Dank (push to talk) 23:00, 12 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you! Pendright (talk) 16:35, 13 June 2014 (UTC)

Closing the COI / Terms of Use RFC[edit]

I'm willing to act as a Non-Admin Closer if you have at least one administrator. Please notify me on my talk page when the RFC is ready for closure. Will it be running 30 days? Robert McClenon (talk) 01:43, 21 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks Robert. I have to recuse on the question of who the closers will be. The RfC has been withdrawn for now, but I'll let you know when it's back on. - Dank (push to talk) 02:03, 21 June 2014 (UTC)
Now that you explain, since I have !voted on the RFC, I should avoid closing. I don't know why you referred to harassment. I don't think that there was any, only that I have a strong opinion that paid commercial editing is harmful. Robert McClenon (talk) 14:42, 24 June 2014 (UTC)
[Robert is referring to my linking WT:HARASSMENT on his talk page.] Oops, I wasn't saying "harassment" is relevant here, only that that's the talk page where I saw your comment (probably because that's where WP:OUTING is). - Dank (push to talk) 15:03, 24 June 2014 (UTC)

Barbecue in North Carolina[edit]

This is the one I was talking about. Needs some research and construction. Barbecue in the United States would be the parent that would need updating to. In a couple of weeks, I should be ready to start plinking around with it. Dennis Brown |  | WER 21:56, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks, John and I will see what books we've got here. - Dank (push to talk) 22:39, 29 June 2014 (UTC)


USS Mahan (DD-364) passed GA in January, and I’ve been working since to bring it up to A-Class standards. It now seems a likely candidate for such a review. But, frankly, I’m having difficulty with some of the instructions for requesting a review. I’m able to add the |A-Class=current| to the project banner (step 2), but no luck with step 3 of the instructions that follow:

  • From there, click on the "currently undergoing" link that appears in the template (below the "Additional information" section header). This will open a page pre-formatted for the discussion of the status of the article.

When I complete step 2, nothing happens. No apparent link to click on and no formatted page on which to discuss the article. So with some exasperation, I’m taking the liberty of asking you to bail me out - if you have the time or inclination. Thanks! Pendright (talk) 22:13, 30 June 2014 (UTC)

Help, anyone? - Dank (push to talk) 22:44, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) The history tab at Talk:USS Mahan (DD-364) disagrees. On that talk page, hit "show" to expand the MILHIST banner. Follow the instructions at WP:MHR. Seems simple. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)
Thank you Dank - I responded to Chris T. on his talk page. Pendright (talk) 02:51, 1 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks Chris. - Dank (push to talk) 12:01, 1 July 2014 (UTC)

Conflict of interest discussion[edit]

If you are stepping aside from closing the discussion, does this mean you would be willing to provide a bit more gentle guidance? There are some very thoughtful, interesting points being brought up. A light bit of moderation could help steer the discussion towards action. I'm not sure, though, of the right time to provide that nudge: personally I was hoping to get a clear consensus on a direction first, so distractions from dissenters later on could be minimized. But the usual eagerness to enact changes may try to move forward before that can happen. Your thoughts on the matter are welcome. isaacl (talk) 22:35, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

I think it would better to stay out of it ... once I lose neutrality, it's gone for good. Btw, I'll be tackling protection policy again, after I release my copyediting software, hopefully this quarter. - Dank (push to talk) 00:32, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Battle of Öland FAC[edit]

Since you provided helpful comments and/or reviewing in related quality assessments, I'm dropping a notice that battle of Öland is now an FAC. Please feel free to drop by with more input!

Peter Isotalo 05:45, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Sure thing. - Dank (push to talk) 10:28, 7 July 2014 (UTC)


Hey, just wanted to stop by and say thanks for combing through some of the hurricane project's ACRs and FACs. It's always good to have a fresh perspective, and your edits have all been great. – Juliancolton | Talk 23:17, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

Glad you like it, and feel free to revert stuff or tell me what you want done different. I'm going through these edits now, and adding some of them to my automated style guide. - Dank (push to talk) 23:29, 7 July 2014 (UTC)

April to June 2014 MILHIST reviews[edit]

WikiChevrons.png The WikiChevrons
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period April to June 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook a staggering 46 reviews. Without reviewers it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Peacemaker67 (send... over) 02:48, 8 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for doing the honors this quarter, PM. Your efforts are appreciated, too. - Dank (push to talk) 03:15, 8 July 2014 (UTC)

A class reviews for Wikipedia:WikiProject Rock music[edit]

Hi. A while back you said you could help getting A class reviews set up. I'd like to give The Who a go at an ACR and see what happens. What do we technically need to do to start the review and ensure people know it's happening? Ritchie333 (talk) (cont) 08:29, 18 July 2014 (UTC)

Hi Ritchie. You can do what WP:TROP does ... just create a section on your project's talk page where people can ask for A-class reviews, and ask people to use ~~~ rather than ~~~~ to sign in that section so that the comments don't get archived. I'm focusing on copyediting software these days rather than reviewing, but I'll be happy to look in from time to time and see how it's coming. - Dank (push to talk) 11:47, 18 July 2014 (UTC)


You lucky lad being able to meet with Dennis in RL ;) I only get to chat with him over Skype. --Kudpung กุดผึ้ง (talk) 12:00, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Yeah, he's just down the road from me. I've been pretty slack about getting together with Wikipedians, outside of a few meetups and Wikimania. - Dank (push to talk) 13:59, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

Demonym for Katanga[edit]

Hello Dank, I hope you are well. I recall that you are quite well-versed on proper word usage, so I thought I would drop you a note regarding the correct denonym for Katanga. I am reviewing the Congo Crisis article for GA and this has popped up—the nominator and I have discussed it briefly and it seems both "Katangan" and "Katangese" are used in sources, but I had thought that Katangese was the correct term. Do you know what the actual situation is? Thanks, Cliftonian (talk) 17:22, 19 July 2014 (UTC),, and SOED all give "Katangese", so I'd go with that. - Dank (push to talk) 18:20, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for responding so quickly Dank, have a great week. Cliftonian (talk) 18:36, 19 July 2014 (UTC)
Sure thing, you too. - Dank (push to talk) 18:39, 19 July 2014 (UTC)


I noticed that you were looking at the non-RFC the other day. A couple of us have been talking about putting up a short watchlist notice to ask editors to try out VisualEditor. We've agreed on text, but kind of lost momentum. What do yout think? Is this something you'd be willing to post? Whatamidoing (WMF) (talk) 16:32, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

My only concern there was that the short discussion at the non-RfC was listed for closing at WP:AN, and I had visions of someone coming in and doing a perfunctory close and causing some trouble. I'm sinking a lot of time into creating a copyediting style guide (and some software to go with it, as you know). I've also got my usual Milhist duties, and I have to be ready to deal with PC2 and COI (paid editing) issues as they come up, at least until the relevant RfCs are done. My plate is pretty full, and getting up to speed on VE issues is probably beyond me (and I don't want to make a post if I don't really know what I'm talking about, not that I haven't done that once or twice in the past :). Best of luck with that, and let me know if there's anything I can help with that I'm already up to speed on. - Dank (push to talk) 19:29, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Speaking of MILHIST, Aaron Halfaker says he has an algorithm to estimate whether articles are correctly assessed. I've asked him to give me a list of stub-rated WPMED articles that might not be stubs any longer. I tried to do this by hand a while ago, and it is tedious. With luck, he might get to it a month from now. If it's as useful as I hope, then we should be able to adapt the code for use by other projects. WhatamIdoing (talk) 21:06, 22 July 2014 (UTC)
Sure, I'm interested in automation of various routine tasks, I'll be happy to check it out. - Dank (push to talk) 21:18, 22 July 2014 (UTC)

Please fill out your JSTOR email[edit]

As one of the original 100 JSTOR account recipients, please fill out the very short email form you received just recently in order to renew your access. Even though you signed up before with WMF, we need you to sign up again with The Wikipedia Library for privacy reasons and because your prior access expired on July 15th. We do not have your email addresses now; we just used the Special:EmailUser feature, so if you didn't receive an email just contact me directly at Thanks, and we're working as quickly as possible to get you your new access! Jake (Ocaasi) 19:48, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks kindly, Jake. - Dank (push to talk) 21:00, 23 July 2014 (UTC)

A query from out of the blue[edit]

Hi Dank.

I've got a project going on and Dennis Brown very emphatically suggested that I get in touch with you. Would you be so kind as to send me an email so that I can fill you in? Thanks, —Tim /// Carrite (talk) 00:43, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

  • It's a trap! ;) But seriously, yes I did recommend you. Dennis Brown |  | WER 00:51, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
    • Certainly, email coming. Standard disclaimer: if it's on a subject with connections to RfCs I close, I can't talk about it privately, it has to be on-wiki. - Dank (push to talk) 01:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)
      • Thanks Tim ... I can't help with your project right now, but best of luck ... I hope we'll be hearing about your progress soon on-wiki. - Dank (push to talk) 03:19, 26 July 2014 (UTC)


Hi. It seems unusual and perhaps unseemly to promote a potential and unformed future COI RfC for the closer to close. Alanscottwalker (talk) 17:06, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, I'll respond on that page (WT:COI). - Dank (push to talk) 18:02, 25 July 2014 (UTC)

A request[edit]

I really liked the edits you made to some of the hurricane articles recently, and I've just written something of a novelty page – 1850 Atlantic hurricane season. It's the first real season article before official records exist, so it's more historical than scientific, if that makes sense. Normally I'm fairly confident in my writing abilities, but here I've had to do a bit more digging and "connect-the-dots" research than normal. I don't think I've crossed the OR threshold, but I'm afraid the writing may be a bit choppier than what I've produced in the past. I'd like to do some more of these very early seasons, and I was wondering if you'd do me the favor of skimming through 1850 and letting me know what makes sense and what doesn't. With your suggestions I'd be able to refine my process a bit and make sure I'm not broadcasting incomprehensible jargon. No problem at all if you don't have the time or inclination, it's not an especially pressing issue. – Juliancolton | Talk 15:29, 26 July 2014 (UTC)

Copyedited per my standard disclaimer. These are my edits. - Dank (push to talk) 17:35, 26 July 2014 (UTC)
Julian, I forgot to answer your question, sorry. Glad you liked the edits, I'll keep an eye on your A-class process. The first sentence isn't bad but wouldn't be my choice; I might go with "was the last year ...". I didn't think it was choppy at all. - Dank (push to talk) 02:54, 28 July 2014 (UTC)