User talk:Molestash/Archive 3: Difference between revisions
→Request for Assessment: new section |
→Request for Assessment: left message |
||
| Line 329: | Line 329: | ||
== Request for Assessment == |
== Request for Assessment == |
||
If I really thought I could assess these articles myself, would you really think that I would be putting these articles up on this page? Rather than continually removing the articles, why not actually '''assess''' them? (Think there might be a reason why the page is called '''Requests for Assessment''' if the articles can't be assessed? |
If I really thought I could assess these articles myself, would you really think that I would be putting these articles up on this page? Rather than continually removing the articles, why not actually '''assess''' them? (Think there might be a reason why the page is called '''Requests for Assessment''' if the articles can't be assessed?) |
||
:Sorry about the previous edit. I had stepped away from my computer for a few minutes and someone must have used my account. [[User:Wild Wolf|Wild Wolf]] ([[User talk:Wild Wolf|talk]]) 17:07, 5 January 2012 (UTC) |
|||
Revision as of 17:07, 5 January 2012
Welcome!
Hello, Molestash, and welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions. I hope you like the place and decide to stay. Here are some pages that you might find helpful:
- The five pillars of Wikipedia
- Tutorial
- How to edit a page and How to develop articles
- How to create your first article (using the Article Wizard if you wish)
- Manual of Style
I hope you enjoy editing here and being a Wikipedian! Please sign your messages on discussion pages using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically insert your username and the date. If you need help, check out Wikipedia:Questions, ask me on my talk page, or ask your question on this page and then place {{helpme}} before the question. Again, welcome! --Ϫ 21:29, 18 November 2010 (UTC)
Wikipedia Ambassador Program at MSU
Hi! I'm leaving you this message because you're listed as a Wikipedian associated with Michigan State University. The Wikipedia Ambassador Program is currently looking for Campus Ambassadors to help with Wikipedia assignments at MSU, which will be participating in the Public Policy Initiative for the Spring 2011 semester. The role of Campus Ambassadors will be to provide face-to-face training and support for students on Wikipedia-related skills (how to edit articles, how to add references, etc.). This includes doing in-class presentations, running workshops and labs, possibly holding office hours, and in general providing in-person mentorship for students.
Prior Wikipedia skills are not required for the role, as training will be provided for all Campus Ambassadors (although, of course, being an experienced editor is a plus).
If you are interested in being a Wikipedia Campus Ambassador, or know someone in the East Lansing area who might be, please email me or leave a message on my talk page.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 20:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 14:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Invitation to join WikiProject United States
 |
Hello, Molestash/Archive 3! 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!!! |
--Kumioko (talk) 04:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
- Welcome to the project and please let me know if you have any comments, questions or suggestions. --Kumioko (talk) 18:16, 5 January 2011 (UTC)
New Years Message for WikiProject United States
With the first of what I hope will be monthly newsletters I again want to welcome you to the project and hope that as we all work together through the year we can expand the project, create missing articles and generally improve the pedia thought mutual cooperation and support. Now that we have a project and a solid pool of willing members I wanted to strike while the iron is hot and solicite help in doing a few things that I believe is a good next step in solidifiing the project. I have outlined a few suggestions where you can help with on the projects talk page. This includes but is not limited too updating Portal:United States, assessing the remaining US related articles that haven't been assessed, eliminating the Unrefernced BLP's and others. If you have other suggestions or are interested in doing other things feel free. I just wanted to offer a few suggestions were additional help is needed. Please feel free to contact me if you have any questions, comments or suggestions or you can always post something on the projects talk page. If you do not want to recieve a monthly message please put an * before your name on the members page.--Kumioko (talk) 03:51, 12 January 2011 (UTC)
Stub
Is there any reason why you mischaracterize an enormous amount of articles as "stub" class? For example, how is George Platt Brett a stub? The article could use more sources, but it's clearly way larger than a stub. I haven't checked all your edits obviously, but all those I did check were not a stub. Please get a better understanding of what constitutes a stub class article before you continue tagging like that.--Atlan (talk) 21:45, 24 January 2011 (UTC)
-I'll admit I dropped the ball on George Platt Brett as characterizing it as a stub but, I went through the majority of the articles I rated and very few had any meaningful content. Size is not the only criteria for a stub article. A stub is, a very short article or a rough collection of information that will need much work to become a meaningful article. It is usually very short, but if the material is irrelevant or incomprehensible, an article of any length falls into this category. If you fell a different rating will suffice on other articles I rated feel free to do so.MOLEY (talk) 16:18, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
- Well, you edited so many articles, I'm not going to go check them all as that would take a long time. Tagging them as stubs when they aren't isn't so bad that it requires immediate reversal anyway. I just wanted to point out you should take a little more time checking the articles, as it seems you were going through lots of articles at great speed.--Atlan (talk) 17:44, 25 January 2011 (UTC)
New WikiProject United States Newsletter: February 2011 edition
Starting with the February 2011 issue WikiProject United States has established a newsletter to inform anyone interested in United States related topics of the latest changes. This newsletter will not only discuss issues relating to WikiProject United States but also:
- Portal:United States
- the United States Wikipedians Noticeboard
- the United States Wikipedians collaboration of the Month - The collaboration article for February is Nineteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
- and changes to Wikipolicy, events and other things that may be of interest to you.
You may read or assist in writing the newsletter, subscribe, unsubscribe or change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you by following this link. If you have an idea for improving the newsletter please leave a message on my talk page or the Newsletters talk page. --Kumioko (talk) 20:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC)
April 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The April 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumioko (talk) 00:58, 7 April 2011 (UTC)
May 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The May 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
. --Kumioko (talk) 15:43, 6 May 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011
|
June 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The June 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumioko (talk) 22:11, 12 June 2011 (UTC)
US National Archives collaboration
 |
United States National Archives WikiProject |
|---|---|
|
The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011
|
July 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The July 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumioko (talk) 13:00, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Mongol Invasions
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Skibsted
Hi Molestash - I have seen your latest edit to the Skibsted article. Skibsted was a Dane from Denmark, not a Dutchman from Holland. The confusion in the minds of many native English speakers is quite common. Or do you have something that links this article to Holland? Clarify or correct? Viking1808 (talk) 06:58, 13 August 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011
|
Rollback
Hello, following a review of your contributions, I have enabled rollback on your account. Please take note of the following:
- Rollback gives you access to certain scripts, including Huggle and Igloo, some of which can be very powerful, so exercise caution
- Rollback is only for blatant vandalism
- Having Rollback rights does not give you any special status or authority
- Misuse of Rollback can lead to its removal by any administrator
- Please read Help:Reverting and Wikipedia:Rollback feature to get to know the workings of the feature
- You can test Rollback at Wikipedia:New admin school/Rollback
- You can display the
{{User wikipedia/rollback}}userbox or the{{Rollback}}top icon on your user page
- If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Reaper Eternal (talk) 01:28, 23 August 2011 (UTC)
Talkback
Message added 03:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Ϫ 03:53, 26 August 2011 (UTC)
September 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The September 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumioko (talk) 02:39, 6 September 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:23, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Stephen Martin Saxby
You removed the military history banner from Stephen Martin Saxby. From what I understand Saxby was in the Navy and used to hand out lists of days when atmospheric disturbances would occur at sea. Other sailors in the navy used these lists from what I understand unless you find evidence to the contrary. This would be the 1800s. Saxby also had a well known disagreement with Admiral Robert Fitzroy. The disagreement appears in print in the second edition of saxby's book. Msruzicka (talk) 22:16, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
- I understand he is notable for his pseudo Meteorology and printed theories but he does not meet the MILHIST requirements here. Association with a person doesn't mean notability along. The partial use of meteorological notes doesn't meet the notability requirements either because they didn't "significantly changed the nature of or conduct of war".--MOLEY (talk) 22:43, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
Logs
Just a follow up: I fixed the issue that was making the code hang, and the WP bot uploaded new logs for the military history project now. — Carl (CBM · talk) 20:51, 23 October 2011 (UTC)
Re: this edit, I have subsequently edited and, I think, improved the article and would appreciate it if you would give it another assessment. Thanks, Shearonink (talk) 07:11, 25 October 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Foxconn
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Foxconn. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 26 October 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 02:32, 27 October 2011 (UTC)
Hello Molestash! Was there any request for assessment of that article? I am asking because I would like to check the related discussion. Other than that, I think "start class" is a bit harsh. Definitely not a "B" (almost single-sourced) but pretty good for "C" I think. In any case, I hope to add more references and, hopefully, more details, in the near future. Have a nice day! --Dipa1965 (talk) 21:05, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
- Hello Dipa, There wasn't any request for assessment on Macrianus Major but it is policy in MIHIST to make sure every article has a rating and B-class checklist complete on every article (Even though the B-Class Checklist is quite backlogged). I disagree whole heartedly that the article is a B-Class. It doesn't have a defined structure required for the C-Class status. It wouldn't be hard to make it a C but I am not trying to make every article a C just give info on what the current state of the article is. I would be happy to reassess once more info is placed into the article. Good Day to you.--MOLEY (talk) 00:56, 1 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Mellanox Technologies
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Mellanox Technologies. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 04:15, 5 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Kodak
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Kodak. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 05:15, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
In re. Astra 400
My copy of the 'Book of Pistols and Revolvers' states "Striking energy is in the neighbourhood of 370 foot-pounds" for 9mm Steyr. For 9mm Bayard Long (9mm Largo), it gives a "muzzle striking energy about 360 foot-pounds." My guess is that the numbers come from chronograph readings from the M1912 and Astra 400 respectively. It is also noted that in both cases, the rounds had been hotted up considerably from their original loadings, and that both cartridges were used in submachineguns. Neither round was then being made by a US manufacturer from whom the authors could get factory loading data, so I suppose it is possible that the particular sort of mystery meat round that they were feeding their pistols was the kind meant to be eaten by Spanish and Austrian submachine guns.
The book aside, I do vaguely remember seeing a forum post where some Steyr shooters were discussing the merits of loading a little lower than the standard handloading data. There might be some dodgy information floating around- or perhaps the Steyrs have just held up to the years less well than the handsome grandfather of the Hi-Points. Nevard (talk) 23:57, 20 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on File talk:North Strathfield Bank.JPG
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on File talk:North Strathfield Bank.JPG. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 09:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 08:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Amigo Energy
Remember that RFCs are part of Dispute Resolution and at times may take place in a heated environment. Please take a look at the relevant RFC page before responding and be sure that you are willing and able to enter that environment and contribute to making the discussion a calm and productive one focussed on the content issue at hand. See also Wikipedia:Requests for comment#Suggestions for responding.
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Amigo Energy. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! However, please note that your input will carry no greater weight than anyone else's: remember that an RFC aims to reach a reasoned consensus position, and is not a vote. In support of that, your contribution should focus on thoughtful evaluation of the issues and available evidence, and provide further relevant evidence if possible.
You have received this notice because your name is on Wikipedia:Feedback request service. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from that page. RFC bot (talk) 10:15, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
December 2011 Newsletter for WikiProject United States
The December 2011 issue of the WikiProject United States 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.
--Kumioko (talk) 03:56, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
Regarding this edit, mind if I ask which parts of the coverage and accuracy criterion hasn't this article met? Specifically, what important facts is this article missing? It's not likely to ever rach B status as there's simply not enough sources to mention that battle, but I believe you made a mistake when it comes to coverage and accuracy. //Halibutt 23:01, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
After double checking through some stuff I think you're right. The information in the article is or nearly is as much as an editor is going to be able to write about the battle. My optimism about the possibility of more detail on the battle seems misplaced. I shall now have a good Wikicry about my over optimism. --MOLEY (talk) 03:36, 13 December 2011 (UTC)
TY
Thanks for the barnstar. Volunteer Marek 00:36, 14 December 2011 (UTC)
Please comment on Talk:Capitalism
Greetings! You have been randomly selected to receive an invitation to participate in the request for comment on Talk:Capitalism. Should you wish to respond to the invitation, your contribution to this discussion will be very much appreciated! If in doubt, please see suggestions for responding. If you do not wish to receive these types of notices, please remove your name from Wikipedia:Feedback request service. — RFC bot (talk) 11:15, 18 December 2011 (UTC)
Kumi-Taskbot
Thanks for showing me that problem. I'll get that fixed. It only removes certain parameters if they =no or blanks but I'm not sure why its doing the bad formatting so I'll make sure that gets fixed. I'll also run back through and see about fixing any that got screwed up. Please let me know if you see anything else. --Kumioko (talk) 22:18, 24 December 2011 (UTC)
The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011
|
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:53, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
Congratulations
|
The Minor Barnstar | |
| Awarded to Molestash, as part of AustralianRupert's 2012 New Year Honours List, in recognition of their work completing B class checklists for Milhist articles throughout 2011. Thank you and keep up the good work! AustralianRupert (talk) 10:29, 31 December 2011 (UTC) |
Virginia Military Institute Article Assessment
Thank you for reviewing the B-class criteria for the Virginia Military Institute article. I knew that the article qualifies for inclusion in WikiProject Military History, but was not sure if it met the WikiProject's more strigent standards for B-class articles. --TommyBoy (talk) 05:22, 2 January 2012 (UTC)
Request for Assessment
If I really thought I could assess these articles myself, would you really think that I would be putting these articles up on this page? Rather than continually removing the articles, why not actually assess them? (Think there might be a reason why the page is called Requests for Assessment if the articles can't be assessed?)