User talk:Woody

User	Talk	Contributions	Awards	Articles	Sandbox

Getting Started Wikipedia Tutorial • The five pillars of Wikipedia How to: edit a page • upload an image Getting Help Frequently Asked Questions Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and Guidelines Neutral point of view • Reliable sources Verifiability • Citing sources • No original research What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Fair use • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The Community Build consensus • Resolving disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Things to do Be bold in editing • Help develop an article Pages needing attention • Peer review Join a WikiProject • Translating articles Cleaning up: General • Spam • Vandalism Miscellaneous Useful templates • Categories • Stubs User pages • Talk pages Tools • User scripts

FACs needing feedback view •
2023 World Snooker Championship	Review it now
Tornado outbreak of February 12, 1945	Review it now
Susanna Hoffs	Review it now
2023 Union Square riot	Review it now

Template:FixBunching

Battle of Sahagún

Hi, I've extended the citations considerably and added a little more text, though it wasn't a very large scale battle, I might be worth another look. The Battle of Myriokephalon is now, I consider, also a very much improved entry. Urselius (talk) 22:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for the reviews. I've beefed up the intro and added some more information, but for an action that took perhaps an hour at most there is only so much you can say.Urselius (talk) 09:05, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

August Newsletter

May I trouble you to give it the once over for typos and release it please to Brownbot when you're done? Many thanks in advance, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 22:25, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for that. Yep, it is getting chunkier, which can't be a bad thing, and I'm delighted to see that Milcon is going great guns :) I'll explain the FL connection some other time; I wasn't, of course, actually in it or anything strenuous like that! We're leaving Provence just after breakfast for the run home (via Lausanne, Riquewihr and Trier). I'll try to log on en route but that depends on availability of cabled connections. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 05:37, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Nominations for the Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The Military history WikiProject coordinator selection process is starting. We are aiming to elect nine coordinators to serve for the next six months; if you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 (UTC) on September 14!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:20, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Contest Department

Hi Woody, I was looking through the scores at the contest department, and I saw that when you graded Harry Murray you classed it as GA when it passed for A-Class some days ago. I was wondering was this just a mistake, or is there a particular reason for doing so? Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 02:18, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for fixing that up, Woody, but according to the table it is 15 points for taking an article from start to A-class, not 10. Lol. Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 10:26, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Not to sound ungrateful for all of your hard work on the contest, but shouldn't the score for SS Pennsylvanian have been 16 (None → A), rather than 10? — Bellhalla (talk) 10:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

My apologies, all A-Class scores were under-scored this month. I have now amended them. Woody (talk) 11:34, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Lol, never mind. I will just put it down to the fact that your a busy man. Thanks, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 12:36, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Pearson DYK

On 2 September, 2008, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Charles Pearson (soldier), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

-- thx Victuallers (talk) 17:22, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

FLRC

Hello, there may be a position open for another FLRC delegate, and I was wondering if you were at all interested in the position. You can find out more here. Thanks, Scorpion⁰⁴²² 20:24, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Battle of Ramadi (2006)

Hi, I'm sorry if I have the wrong person, but I'm currently in a dispute about the content of the Battle of Ramadi (2006) article. I think I'm getting rather heated about it, so I'd like you (or if you can suggest someone else more appropriate) to take a look at it and suggest how the issue might be resolved. Thank you. Lawrencema (talk) 21:59, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXX (August 2008)

The August 2008 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) 00:47, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Victoria Cross - NZ VC etc. thefts

Hi Woody. While I agree that what was there needed improvement, I'm not altogether sure that what you have put there solves all the problems.

• It said: "Lord Ashcroft contributed significantly to this amount". You replaced that with: "significantly paid for by Lord Ashcroft".
  • I'm not very sure what "significantly paid for" actually means.
  • The original implies that Ashcroft didn't pay ALL of the reward. If one removes "significantly" from your change, one is left with "paid for by Lord Ashcroft". That's not the same. I'm not sure what your addition of "significantly" was meant to mean. Further, I'm not sure what the addition of "significantly" actually does mean.
  • What was wrong with "Lord Ashcroft contributed significantly to this amount" that lead you to change it?
    • This section was far too long, we could just remove him altogether. Significantly means he contributed a significant part of the reward, exactly as it says before. Woody (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
• It said: "New Zealand Police announced all the medals had been recovered as a result of the reward". You removed "as a result of the reward". Why?
  • Not backed up by sources, especially as the "gangster" who recovered them says it wasn't about the money. Woody (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
• It said: "A high profile Auckland lawyer, Chris Comeskey, played a key part in the drawn out negotiations to safely return the medals." You removed that sentence. Why?
  • Has no relevance, this is about the medals, not Chris Comesekey. Woody (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)
• Several versions ago you reverted it to say: "While there has been much public debate about the need to offer reward money in order to retrieve the medals, there is universal relief that they have been safely returned". Yes, the tenses needed changing, but now it just says: "There was much public debate about the need to offer reward money in order to retrieve the medals." This reader feels that it now seems "unfinished" ...
  • I didn't change it because of the tenses; I changed it because it was fluff, and not encyclopedic. It is grammatically correct and it is already made clear that they have been recovered. Woody (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:28, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

• So in summary, this is an encyclopedia, and we need to make sure we don't place too much emphasis on recent events. As the sources shows, the thefts of a VC are not rare, so why concentrate on this one, and dedicate half the section to it? Woody (talk) 17:59, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Fair enough. Yes, I agree with you, and with your even more recent changes. Thanks for the clarifications and explanations. Most appreciated. Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 22:36, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Always happy to clarify, thanks for picking me up on it; the article is in a better shape now as a result! Regards. Woody (talk) 22:44, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Aston Villa

Moved to Talk:Aston Villa F.C. seasons... Woody (talk) 14:26, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

All the hyperlinks are tidyed but the W and R/U are the same as Chelsea

What about line-ups for finals. I have listed with a commet—Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Hall of England (talk • contribs) 10:15, 5 September 2008

What about them? If you could add to or expand them, that would be great. I haven't got round to them yet, I have been concentrating on the main Villa articles. Regards. Woody (talk) 10:25, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

On the Highbury (Former home of Arsenal) the FA Cup semis are on the page so why not Villa Park. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Mr Hall of England (talk • contribs)

• 1887 FA Cup Final No Line-up
• 1892 FA Cup Final No Manager and Captain
• 1895 FA Cup Final No Manager and Captain
• 1897 FA Cup Final No Manager and Captain
• 1905 FA Cup Final No Line-up
• 1913 FA Cup Final Model Example (No Captain)
• 1920 FA Cup Final No Line-up
• 1924 FA Cup Final No Line-up
• 1957 FA Cup Final Model Example
• 1961 Football League Cup Final No Line-up
• 1963 Football League Cup Final Model Example (No Captain)
• 1971 Football League Cup Final No Line-up
• 1975 Football League Cup Final Model Example
• 1977 Football League Cup Final No Line-ups
• 1982 European Cup Final Model Example
• 1982 UEFA Super Cup No Line-up
• 1982 Intercontinental Cup Need to do
• 1994 Football League Cup Final Model Example (No Captain)
• 1996 Football League Cup Final Model Example (No Captain)
• 2000 FA Cup Final Model Example

Avoiding redirects

Sorry for filling up your watchlist. Aaron carass (talk) 14:38, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

FLC

No, I never realised quite how often you'd failed to win something. Seriously, I think for completeness they should go in, and I don't think their addition would make the section look cluttered or detract from your glorious victories. And your r/u in 92/93 was the Prem rather than the "old" First Division, which'll make it look a bit less like ancient history. ;-) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:30, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Up to you. Do you consider the Prem as a different league from Div 1; if so, then probably it should go on a separate line. If you consider they're different names for the top level of English football, then leave it how it is, and head it First Division/Premier League. Which is what I did at a lower level with Div 2/Championship. cheers, Struway2 (talk) 17:50, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

I'll have you know we won the Second Division before your lot did, though I have to agree you got to the Third twenty-odd years before us... You've got a space after the colon on the winners lines but not on the runners-up. Other than that, it all looks truly glorious (is there a 'finger down throat' emoticon?) cheers, Struway2 (talk) 18:36, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/USS Nevada (BB-36)

First, this is not an attempt at canvassing, and I apologize if it seems like one. Second, would it be possible for you to comment there? Thanks, ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 18:51, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

A-class

Did GimmeBot just approve Nevada for A-class on this article's talk page?!?! ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 23:23, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Regardless, it messed up the GA date approved too...it was passed on the 3rd, not the 4th! ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 23:24, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Wow, and a different bot did this, messing up a reference more than it was before (it was screwed up before because it needed another " mark...) Bots...love them and hate them...=/ ^-talk- the_ed17 ^-contribs- 23:44, 5 September 2008 (UTC)

Sarah Palin

Hi, I was wondering if you could fix a tiny problem with one of the lead paragraphs:

Palin is the [[Geraldine Ferraro|second woman to run for vice president]] on a [[major party|major-party]] ticket and the first Republican woman to do so.

Piping "Geraldine Ferraro" that way is a bit of a no-no according to WP:PIPE. As a clearer alternative:

Following [[Geraldine Ferraro]], Palin is the second woman to run for vice president on a [[major party|major-party]] ticket and the first Republican woman to do so.

Could the sentence please be changed to reflect my suggestion? Thanks in advance. Just64helpin (talk) 15:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Woody, can you please review Talk:Sarah_Palin/Archive_11#Why_is_Geraldine_Ferraro_in_the_intro_of_Palin.27s_biography.3F and instead of Ferraro revert to the previous sentence and pipe to List of VP candidates? I think you may have unintentionally violated consensus here. Let me know, thanks, Kaisershatner (talk) 17:28, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, just saw your edit is an hour old - I made the change myself, will be happy to discuss at talk or here if there are probs with it. Best, Kaisershatner (talk) 17:33, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Good gosh, Woody, are you the designated neutral admin to wade in to that minefield? It's such a controversy now that I'm almost afraid to ask an admin to do simple MoS cleanup, that's making me crazy. Should you accept this mission: the "Energy and environment" section breaches WP:ACCESSIBILITY for our readers who use screen readers and WP:MOS#Images. The left-aligned image is right under a section heading, and should be moved down a paragraph, and templated "hatnotes" go before images, not after. Do you 'spose you could move the image down one paragraph without getting desysopped? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:37, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

You trying to get me desysopped Sandy? I have made the edit now. Regards. Woody (talk) 17:48, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Ah, I will sleep so much better now, knowing that our most controversial article is MoS compliant :-) Hope it doesn't cost you your job, though; what would you do without your annual bonus? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:53, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Yep, as long as it conforms to MOS, sod all the other stuff! ;-) I seem to have come away unscathed for the moment, but I am sure someone will object eventually, if only for the fun of it. I am away from the hotbed / cesspit next week though; sailing the high seas, so other admins can deal with it! Regards. Woody (talk) 18:32, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

You are everywhere, and don't miss anything. What will I do with you off at sea? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:31, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, Woody, thanks for your reply and also for the formatting fix. Best, Kaisershatner (talk) 18:05, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Don't sail the high seas, we need you to do a re-review!!

Would you mind reassessing Supreme Headquarters Allied Powers Europe, following on from your PR comments, and leaving any thoughts on the talk page? Hope you had a good sailing holiday. Buckshot06(prof) 17:21, 10 September 2008 (UTC)

with thanks

		The Content Review Medal of Merit
		In recognition of your help improving Military history articles through the Military history review process in June, July and August 2008, please accept this Content Review Medal of Merit, --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:13, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

New improved "alerts" template

You may wish to replace your current alerts template with:

{{WPMILHIST Review alerts}}

which is more comprehsive, containing A-class, Peer review and featured article information. All the best, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:33, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

Hey, the "tlx|" thing is seriously cool. I had no idea it existed. Thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:37, 14 September 2008 (UTC)

I was just going to do that :) Is the main banner updating properly on your pages? I've flushed my cache and it's still showing the old one, saying that voting hasn't started. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 00:26, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

WWII VCs

I've just picked up cheaply a copy of VCs of the Second World War by John Frayn Turner, ISBN 1844150674 which should be useful when you get round to upgrading the WWII list to featured status. David Underdown (talk) 13:02, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Serial thanks

		The Barnstar of Awesomeness
		For awesome contributions (including but not limited to mopping up me serial typos), I delight in awarding you this understated barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 17:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election

The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30!
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:56, 15 September 2008 (UTC)