On a related topic, the project awards medals and chevrons for participants in MilHist-related Peer, A-Class and FAC reviews each quarter. The top three reviewers in the July–September quarter, which was tallied and the awards given last month, were Dank (55 reviews), Nikkimaria (32) and AustralianRupert (28). Our deep appreciation and congratulations to them. The full list of reviewers and the number of reviews they conducted can be found here, and we thank all of them for their efforts.
As always, we encourage everyone to get involved in these reviews and offer their constructive criticism. While it may initially seem a little daunting to join in what can be lively discussion on an article's merits, particularly at A and FA level, you can always cut your teeth in the B-Class and Good Article review processes. The project's coordinators and other experienced editors are there for advice, and there's nothing like simply picking an article and going to the Article Milestones on its talk page to check over previous reviews and get an idea of what's needed. Remember that at A and FA level, the reviews that are most helpful to the coordinators and delegates who judge the supports (and opposes) to determine if there's genuine consensus for an article's promotion are those that demonstrate that the reviewer is familiar with the criteria for promotion and has carefully considered the article against those criteria. This doesn't mean that reviews have to be long-winded, but that they should involve more than a bare "Support—it's great!" or "Oppose—not good enough!".