User talk:Hamish59

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
To try to avoid fragmenting discussions:
* if you post a message on this page, I'll reply here. Please add it to your watchlist
* if I leave you a message on your talk page, it will be added to my watchlist so feel free to reply to it there instead of here.
Please sign and date your message by typing four tildes (~~~~).


The Bugle: Issue CI, August 2014[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 15:23, 17 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 August 2014[edit]

The Signpost: 20 August 2014[edit]

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot[edit]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation, and please do get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day Quality Title Content Headings Images Links Sources Tagged with…
30 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub The Register of the Victoria Cross (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
22 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: C The King's Own Calgary Regiment (RCAC) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
91 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: B Infantry of the British Army (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
32 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: C The Royal Canadian Dragoons (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
3,087 3.0 Quality: High, Assessed class: C, Predicted class: A 2014 pro-Russian unrest in Ukraine (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Add sources
51 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start 4th Canadian Division (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Add sources
432 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start XXX Corps (United Kingdom) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
51 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Reconnaissance, surveillance, and target acquisition (United States) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
16 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub 72nd Regiment, Duke of Albany's Own Highlanders (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Cleanup
56 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B I Corps (United Kingdom) (talk) 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
12 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Stub Ammunition column (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
47 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: B Royal Hampshire Regiment (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Expand
51 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: B Royal Regiment of Canadian Artillery (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
394 2.0 Quality: Medium, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: B 1st Armored Division (United States) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 Unencyclopaedic
257 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start 2nd Armored Division (United States) (talk) 2.0 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Unencyclopaedic
20 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Land Force Central Area (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
34 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start 48th Infantry Brigade Combat Team (United States) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
116 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Kamerun (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Merge
33 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Start, Predicted class: Start Allied technological cooperation during World War II (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
82 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start 11th Hussars (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 2.0 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
2 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: List, Predicted class: Stub Order of Battle: Second Guangxi Campaign (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Wikify
4 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub John Moyle (British Army officer) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
7 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Standing Army (film) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
10 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Start British Land Units of the First World War (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Orphan
6 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Armed Forces Council (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
11 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Fiona O'Donnell (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
11 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Start 45th Infantry Division (United Kingdom) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 2.0 0.0 Please add more images 2.0 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
5 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Unassessed, Predicted class: Stub 7th Infantry Brigade (United Kingdom) (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 0.0 Please add more images 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
9 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Battle of Gemmano (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub
9 1.0 Quality: Low, Assessed class: Stub, Predicted class: Stub Battle of Drocourt-Quéant Line (talk) 0.0 Please add more content 0.0 Please create proper section headings 2.0 0.0 Please add more wikilinks 0.0 Please add more sources Stub

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!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. Regards from Nettrom (talk), SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 23:43, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 August 2014[edit]

Disambiguation link notification for September 5[edit]

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

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:21, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

Was intentional, hence "disambiguation needed" added too. Hamish59 (talk) 09:28, 5 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 September 2014[edit]

Good work![edit]

Thank you for all your good work fixing citations. Keep it up! - 2/0 (cont.) 01:16, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

|displayauthors=9 added incorrectly[edit]

In this edit, you added |displayauthors=9 to make an error message go away, but the original article has more than nine authors, so the proper fix is to either add |displayauthors=8 to replicate the existing display or click through to the source and add the remaining authors. The former is less work; the latter is more accurate. If you have made similar edits, can you please change the "9" to an "8" to avoid making it appear, inaccurately, as if there are nine and only nine authors? Thanks.

Also in that particular citation, authors were duplicated. All of the article's authors are listed in the |author= parameter already, so the citation is not accurate. I have fixed this one. Be careful out there; there's a lot of crazy stuff in citations. – Jonesey95 (talk) 01:26, 13 September 2014 (UTC)

Ah, my mistake. I saw "last9=" and no "last10=" so thought there was only 9 authors. I did not realize / spot that "author=" was being used also. Redundant, surely? Hamish59 (talk) 10:23, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Yes, redundant, but the larger point applies to your other similar edits. If there are nine authors listed, you can't assume that displaying all nine is the correct way to fix the error message. The citation template was previously limited to nine authors, but it is no longer limited. That means that three ways to fix the error message are valid: add |displayauthors=8 to replicate the existing display (without checking the original source to see if it has more than nine authors); click through to the source, see that there are more than nine authors, and add the remaining authors; or click through to the source, see that there are exactly nine authors, and add |displayauthors=9 (or use a larger number). It's your choice, but one of those should be chosen, as far as I can tell. Simply adding |displayauthors=9 is not a valid choice, as it often misrepresents the number of authors in the source.
Thanks for cleaning up these error messages. We are close to the point where we can get rid of this error message and its tracking category entirely. It once had about 12,000 articles in it; I cleaned up over 11,000 of them using manual editing and a little help from Citation Bot. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:05, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Understood. I will go back through the ones I have done. Hamish59 (talk) 17:10, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Thanks. I appreciate your diligence. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:46, 14 September 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 September 2014[edit]