Jump to content

User talk:The ed17

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Climie.ca (talk | contribs) at 20:50, 7 December 2011 (→‎A beer for you!: + and notice). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Military history WikiProject
Articles for review
Featured Article candidates
Battle of Saipan • German atrocities committed against Soviet prisoners of war • The Motherland Calls • Battle of Lake Providence • Jochi • Yugoslav torpedo boat T6 • Robert Poore • Chagatai Khan
Featured Article Review Candidates
Byzantine Empire • Edward I of England • Northrop YF-23 • Middle Ages • Thomas C. Hindman • Isaac Brock • Pre-dreadnought battleship
A-Class Review (Criteria/FAQ)
Henry Biard • Miyoshi Nagayoshi • Ernest J. King • Lockheed YF-22 • SPARS
Good Article Nominations
Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma • 1864 Washington Arsenal explosion • Felek al-Din Dündar • Roswell incident • Mohammad Shah Qajar • Gubir shootdown • Eleanor of Castile • Soldiers' and Sailors' Arch • Northrop B-2 Spirit • Battle of Ekiokpagha • Simon Stuart (general) • 170th Rifle Division (Soviet Union) • Dabney Coleman • Benin Air Force • Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) • Crusading movement • Battle of Thorgo • Jarrett Robertson • Tel al-Sultan attack • Charles Keating IV • Sack of Delhi (1757) • Black and Tans • Diaspora Revolt • Peruvian cruiser Lima • Castlereagh–Canning duel • Ottoman minelayer Intibah • Ottoman destroyer Yarhisar • Piri Reis • Eunus • Patrick J. Ryan (chaplain) • George Preece • Francis L. Sampson • HMS Regulus (1785)
Good Article Reassessments
Battle of the Yarmuk • Battle of Plataea • Siege of Szigetvár • Mehmed II's Albanian campaign • Manley Power • USS Texas (BB-35) • George W. Bush
Peer Review
Henry Clay Work • Charles the Bold • 1939 Liechtenstein putsch • Sher Shah Suri • Rwandan genocide • Battle of Sark
See the full list of open tasks

South American dreadnought race

Hi, Ed. I don't have it here with me right now, but I'm going to travel and visit my parents in a couple of weeks and then I could check it out and bring it back with me. What are you looking for? --Lecen (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It's a pleasure to help, but as I said before, you'll have to wait a couple of weeks until I get my book. Do you know if all photos owned by the brazilian navy can be brought to Commons or only the ones that can be seen in the navy's official website? --Lecen (talk) 21:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The reason why I asked that is because I found a website full of photos of the Minas Geraes[1] and São Paulo[2] dreadnoughts. If you place the mouse cursor over the photos, you'll see that in a few of them the description "(Foto: SDM)" will appear. "SDM" stands for "Serviço de Documentação da Marinha" (Service of Documentation of the Navy). Those are pictures found in the Brazilian Navy's archives. If they could be used here, you would be able to fill all those articles with many good pictures of both battleships. --Lecen (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

FA

Is that a South American Battleship I see as a featured article? Nice work :] – GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, yes it is. Can't imagine who'd be writing on a topic like that. ;-) Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Congrats Ed! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 20:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
 The WikiChevrons 
For your tireless efforts to educate us on our "A-B-C" battleships.

- The Bushranger One ping only 20:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA. Thanks Bushranger! Long time no see; hope you're well. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:33, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I WikiBreaked for awhile. RL derp, then got sucked into the black hole that is Minecraft. Returning to normalcy now though and good to be back! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 07:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds like fun. ;-) I'm very glad to see you back! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

SCSU

Hi Ed, my name is Tom Peters User:bythefire and I am a member of Professor Tess Marchant-Shapiro's User:Marchantshapiro Political Participation class. She has you listed as our Online Ambassador. I hope I am writing to the correct person and I hope to be able to use you as a resource in the future. Bythefire (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Excellent, Thank you for the information Ed. I look forward to working with you in the near future. Bythefire (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ed, I followed my course assignment link to this point. Would you like me to talk to you through here or the page I originally contacted you on? By the way, the page that I am going to be working on is the Outdoor Advertising Association of America. I was going to post a link to it here, but apparently entering the name with { these brackets around it doesn't work. I guess that is my first question. How do I figure out what the name of the page is so I can use it as a link? Thank you for your help. Tom Bythefire (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Please disregard the first question. I now realize that I came to the same place from two different points. Bythefire (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi again! This page is fine; I think the other one emails me(?). Links require [[ and ]] around them – that will create Outdoor Advertising Association of America. The title of the page (at the top) is the one you want to link, so for example this one is "User talk:The ed17". Wikipedia:Cheatsheet may also help you. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome, thank you! Bythefire (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hi Ed! I hope all is well. Smallozzi (talk) 13:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Steph! It's not too bad for me, just class 1-2:40 and work 3-close. Hope life in Connecticut is being good to you! (less cold than here, at least) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Hello Ed. I've just been updated my page to get ready to move over but when I have switch it on the main page and press preview I get the messages: "The topic of this article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (October 2011)" and "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)". I believe I went a little over-the-top with references, but obviously not! The first one concerns me because I don't want to update the page and then my account get suspended because the article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. How would I go about fixing these problems before I transfer my sandbox to the main article ? Thank you, Chris. ChrisMcBSCSU (talk) 04:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your advice! I will definitely do all of that. I have just been piecing together everything tonight and I see your point on the quotations. I was under the impression I had to upload it to the main article today for class but I'm actually unsure. I won't do it until, as you say, it's more thorough with more of my own words. I was just going to keep editing it as the semester went with how it was now, but I'll put more detail in it before I do that. I do also have to create a Do You Know short/page for submission; any hints for creating one of those? Otherwise, thank you for getting back so quickly! ChrisMcBSCSU (talk) 05:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, my photo has been deleted. :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisMcBSCSU (talk • contribs) 22:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Political Participation (Tess Marchant-Shapiro)

Hey there, Ed! I've been approached by a couple of students from the above referenced course, requesting that I work with them as mentor. After a quick glance at the page linked above, I see that much of the course and a few articles directly correlate to my professional background. I would like to sign on as a second OA to support the class. Out of respect, I wanted to contact you first. Do you think the class could use another OA? What are your thoughts? Cind.amuse (Cindy) 19:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Cindy! I wouldn't mind at all. I'm not sure yet if it can use another ambassador, but the more the merrier, especially if you're already involved in the topic! ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Student from political participation class

Hi Ed, just a heads up... Julie from the Political Participation class contacted me regarding mentorship. I told her that you are the online ambassador of the class and would be mentoring the students in the class. Bejinhan talks 04:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds good, thanks very much! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Ed, your page looks good, I'm trying to get on your level. Regards Stanleya3 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Armand! Good luck, and let me know if I can help anytime. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ed!

I checked out your page and it is one to be admired. I look forward to working with you this semester!

Thanks,

Juliejones24 (talk) 18:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hi,

My name is Laura. I am currently working on the The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty article. I am working on this article as an assignment for my political science class. I am wondering if you will be my mentor?

Laura.Muro2 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC).[reply]

Hello Ed, my name is Winston I am a Political Science major at Southern Connecticut State University. The topic I will be working on deals with the American Gas Association. I was hoping you can be my mentor for this project; it would be very helpful to learn more abouth the basics and the fundementals on how to write a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winstonhry (talk • contribs) 19:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello everyone! I'm the online ambassador for your course, so ask me any specific questions you have and I'll do my best to answer them. Julie - me too! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I am looking forward to working with you this semester Ed.

Bvandell22 (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


I am wondering what should I do because my organization the National Union of Students Black Students' Campaign branched off the National Union of Students and the only information about the organization is on the website so im wondering what should i do? ive tried to contact ambassadors and everything and this project is beginning to confuse me. Ronald06514 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC).[reply]

The Signpost: 26 September 2011


Heh :) - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 20:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Update on courses and ambassador needs

Hello, Ambassadors!

I wanted to give you one last update on where we are this term, before my role as Online Facilitator wraps up at the end of this week. Already, there are over 800 students in U.S. classes who have signed up on course pages this term. About 40 classes are active, and we're expecting that many more again once all the classes are up and running.

On a personal note, it's been a huge honor to work with so many great Wikipedians over the last 15 months. Thanks so much to everyone who jumped in and decided to give the ambassador concept a try, and double thanks those of you who were involved early on. Your ideas and insights and enthusiasm have been the foundation of the program, and they will be the keys the future of the program.

Courses looking for Online Ambassadors

Still waiting to get involved with a class this term, or ready to take on more? We have seven classes that are already active and need OA support, and eleven more that have course pages started but don't have active students yet. Please consider joining one or more of these pods!

Active courses that really need Online Ambassadors:

Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Billy Hathorne

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Nyttend (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just added a second comment, which is much more weighty than the one that prompted the talkback. Nyttend (talk) 01:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Moonriddengirl's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Congratulations!

I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!

Discussions of our plans for the coming year will no doubt begin in the next few days. In the meantime, please make sure that you have the coordinators' discussion page on your watchlist, as most of the relevant activity happens there. If you have not already done so, you may want to read the relevant courses in the project academy, as well as the discussion page and its recent archives.

If you have any questions about your work as a coordinator, or anything else, please don't hesitate to ask me directly. Kirill [talk] [prof] 02:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Kirill! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thank you Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks MisterBee, same goes to you. I'm looking forward to working with ya! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the compliment

I just noticed this and I wanted to tell you that I really appreciated what you said. Thank you. --John (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think I'm the only one who feels that way... compliments are given too seldom around here. Remind me to give them to you directly next time. ;-) You're quite welcome, and thanks for your edits to South American dreadnought race! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Any time, and if you ever want me to take a look at any article, just drop me a note. --John (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks again, and I will. I don't know how many articles I have left in me with the increased workload each new semester brings, but I'll probably ping you when I bring the dreadnought race article to FAC. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations!

Coordinator of the Military history Project, September 2010-September 2011

Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy (talk) 22:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 September newsletter

We are on this year's home straight, with less than a month to go until the winner of the 2011 WikiCup will be decided. The fight for first place is currently being contested by Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions), Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions) and Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions), all of whom have over 200 points. This round has already seen multiple featured articles (1991 Atlantic hurricane season from Hurricanehink and Northrop YF-23 from Sp33dyphil) and a double-scoring featured list (Miyagawa's 1948 Summer Olympics medal table). The scores will likely increase far further before the end of the round on October 31 as everyone ups their pace. There is not much more to say- thoughts about next year's competition are welcome on the WikiCup talk page or the scoring talk page, and signups will open once a few things have been sorted out.

If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 12:54, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jul-Sep 2011

The Content Review Medal of Merit  
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. Buggie111 (talk) 22:57, 1 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

alt-text

I'll read the piece you linked to... but doubt I'll end up agreeing that alt text is unwarranted (and I know who Matt Cutts is). Alt-text is a good thing for a bunch of reasons; it's not just about non-sighted users, it's also for users wo/images on (few, I know), for users with trouble getting the images to load, and especially for tools like GoogleBot. As a test, I Googled the alt-text I'd added: "Black and white photo of battleship at sea and steaming to the 'left' with a noticeable plume of smoke trailing from the stack" and got the above linked image of the U.S.S. San Pablo (from The Sand Pebbles (film)). Ok, it's a color image of a gunboat, not a battleship, and it's on a river, but it's going to the left, and it has a noticeable plume of smoke trailing from the stack. Captions are for readers, are certainly important, but alt-text is fundamentally about associating descriptive data with an image. Such information should part of the description on the file's page, but when people Google for images, we want them to find the articles they are used on, not the file-page. Alt-text helps this, as well as those with vision impairments.

Pleased to meet you.  —Portuguese Man o' War 22:52, 2 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I'm pleased to meet you as well. I understand where you are coming from, but the alt-text is not meant to literally describe images. See [3]. Wikipedia's captioning suffices for 95+% of the cases I've come across. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:56, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Right Stuff

Hello Ed and congrats on becoming MILHIST Coord. I was hoping you would have some time for an interview for the WPConservatism newsletter, The Right Stuff. Just a few questions about what makes MILHIST so successful. Thanks! – Lionel (talk) 07:10, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! Given the current political environment out there, I'm a bit leery on taking political positions (perceived or unperceived) on Wikipedia ... what do you think? :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I understand. Why don't we revisit sometime in the future. – Lionel (talk) 04:12, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. My apologies. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:01, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Jutland

I saw your edit on the article on the Battle of Jutland,[4] and checked.

  • Either different editions of VE Tarrant's book Jutland, the German Perspective are paginated differently, or the page number was wrong. What I have done is to assume the former, got rid of the cite template and inserted a reference that enables one to explain.
  • Tarrant's text said "hard to starboard", and the diagram showed the ship turning to the right.

Of course this means that all the other citations to VE Tarrant's book will be 'wrong' for any user who has the same edition as me. Maybe citations should say what edition is referred to?--Toddy1 (talk) 07:58, 4 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, the article should certainly include the edition, as page numbers will almost always vary between editions. Doing so is mandated by Chicago for this reason. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:54, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RfCs – October 2011

Hi Ed. Would you be able to close some RfCs:

  1. Wikipedia:Village pump (policy)#RFC on the bot-addition of identifier links to citations
  2. Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Proposal: date formats in reference sections
  3. Wikipedia:Village pump (proposals)#Remove ability for new users to create other accounts
  4. Talk:2005 Ahvaz unrest#Merge with Khūzestān Province.
  5. Wikipedia:Requests for comment/Main Page features

These RfCs are from the this revision of the Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard. Some of the RfCs are easier to close than others, but if you don't have the time or the inclination to close any RfCs, then no worries. Cunard (talk) 07:26, 5 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Cunard, I will try to get to these tomorrow UTC-time. If I don't, you can safely assume I don't have any time. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]


Glitch in the system?

-- Greetings Ed, first, just out of curiosity, how did you come by the notice I left MRG about the same 'glitch'(?) problem I am having on the Stephen Decatur page? Just thought it sort of a coincidence that you stumbled upon a message about the same problem.
-- In any event, I am wondering who is the 'grand-guru' regarding Wikipedia's software/system management. Thought perhaps he/she would be the one to address with the problem, that is, if MRG isn't the one to best approach.
-- Also, I am thinking about joining the 'Military history WikiProject', if anything, just to get some feed back on the Stephen Decatur page, which I will be nominating for FA sometime soon, that is, if there isn't any problems that still need addressing. I have rewritten it almost from scratch. A few months back it was a fraction of the size it is now, had no bibliography or RS's and was lacking citations throughout the page. I am also working on and rewriting the Thomas Macdonough page and hope to make it a FA also. It too was in sort of a sorry state a couple of months ago. There are a number of other naval officer pages that are in dire need of attention also, as I suspect you might know. In time I hope to get some of them up to speed.
-- Was checking out the page you've been working on. -- Nice!! If you're a ships and sailing history buff for amusement you might want to check out my gallery of Ships on stamps In full view they often show some great detail. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 01:06, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I watchlist her page. I left a comment about the glitch at WP:VPT, which is where most things like that should be noted. :-) Feel free to join! We have an A-class assessment process that can give some very useful feedback prior to FAC. It's less rigorous and much less stressful, I've found. Re South American dreadnought race, thanks! I looked through the stamps and they look good. I'm not sure how many are suitable for articles, but in certain circumstances, they'd be an awesome addition. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
After reading your note here I went to 'VPT' and my first reaction was 'Oh-my-God ... it will be weeks, months(!), before they get around to our little problem. But when I checked out the effected pages -- lo'and behold -- they were fixed! WP sure works in mysterious ways (to me anyway). Left a thank you note. -- The stamps? Well, most of them work with the philatelic (stamp and postal history) pages, and many work on the President's pages, esp in the legacy sections, as every prez (not living) is honored on US postage, esp Washington, Lincoln and Jefferson. (I created and wrote the US Presidents on US postage stamps page.) DYK that Lincoln is the only US president ever to appear on an airmail stamp? (yep!) Enough about stamps. Will look into 'Military history WikiProject' and see what's brewin'. Thanks for your help and feedback, Ed. Keep in touch! -- Gwillhickers (talk) 07:35, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oops, sorry, I meant their suitability in ship articles. My mind didn't think about the other 3.5 million articles we have. ;-) Anytime! Hope you like the project! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Italian Wikipedia ITN posting

Ed, a few editors have directly questioned your decision in light of strong opposition since you added this entry. Could you please take another look at the comments at ITN/C and review your decision? Thanks in advance. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 03:39, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'll look at it now. I've been offline for most of the night, sorry. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:23, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I just want to post to support both your decision to post and decision to pull. At the time of posting, a lot of the opposes were spurious. Since posting a stronger argument was made that the wiretapping bill would have been a non-event were it not for the actions of the Italian Wikipedia. I still disagree with those arguments, but in fairness those opposed did belatedly explain their position. You were put in an impossible situation, but nonetheless handled it very well. Regards, —WFC— 12:20, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks WFC, that means a lot. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:18, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Just wanted to add here, I wasn't having a go at your decision and I'm acutely aware of the difficulties admins face in determining consensus on controversial issues. I think you acted in good faith at all times. My last comment on defending the navel-gazing votes was an objection by principle, since I think arguments that don't specifically contradict a policy should always be considered in determining consensus. I apologise if that came across personally, it wasn't intended that way. I would have made this reply in that thread but with accusations of treason (of all things) thrown around by one editor, I don't think it's wise to add anything more to it. TechnoSymbiosis (talk) 21:59, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's fine, we're all allowed to civilly disagree here – that's what Wikipedia is built on! Thanks for leaving a note here, it's appreciated (and good thinking in leaving it here rather than at that thread...) :-) Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 3 October 2011

National Archives

...is, in fact, not the Library of Congress. ;-) (Wikipedia:Meetup/NARA_2#Other_requests) Did you mean to ask about something else? Dominic·t 18:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

HAHA. Nope, that's what I meant to ask for... whoops. Thanks for correcting me. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:12, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Joined Military History Project

Hi Ed, (permission to come aboard, sir!) I just signed up and joined the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history and Maritime warfare task force. Hope to make some new friends. I was perusing through your talk page and noticed some impressive awards -- looks like you've been at it for some time. (Salute!) I hope to bring attention to a number of pages covering Early American naval commanders, as many of them are in need of work. As I mentioned I have brought the Stephen Decatur and Thomas Macdonough pages up to speed and will soon be building the bibliographies on pages like Oliver Hazard Perry, James Barron, William Bainbridge, Edward Preble, John Barry, John Rodgers and others, and aim to bring in depth coverage to these pages too. I've already started on a few of these. Your input is of course always welcomed. -- Gwillhickers (talk) 22:58, 6 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Gwill! You may want to watchlist the main project talk page (WT:MILHIST), as that is where most discussions will take place. You can normally get help and/or help others there as well. Otherwise... welcome aboard! Glad to hear some of these more-neglected figures in naval history will get some attention. Good luck and let me know if I can help in any way! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:28, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

User:Goldblooded

This user has been blocked for 48 hours by Spartaz for violating 3RR. Would you consider reestablishing your indefblock from July, which I only just now found out about? You originally blocked Goldblooded for constantly attacking other editors, and recently, he has been constantly attacking other editors. Please see his recent edit summaries here, his attacks on the admin who reported him for edit warring here and here, his attacks on me here (although if you don't want to read through all that I don't blame you), his attack on Cameron Scott here, and his attacks on Binksternet, Parsecboy, and you here. I don't know if anybody came across his previous blocklog or those (now-archived) discussions from July, but I feel like if that whole debacle had gotten brought up earlier, we wouldn't be talking about a mere 48 hours off. CityOfSilver 23:07, 7 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Alternatively we can just give him to User:Worm That Turned, and hope that his reputable system of mentorship succeeds in this case. →Στc. 00:00, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
He had mentorship from Zscout; that was why he was unblocked back in July. I'm not optimistic that he can come back and be a true editor of the encyclopedia. Being able to write and/or edit articles well is one part of that, but civilly interacting with people is another part, and he has not had a consistent pattern of civility since he started here. Having said all that, I'm too involved at this point – even if I thought I wasn't, he certainly thinks I've played a big part in his troubles. I would suggest going to ANI to find consensus and get what will probably end in an indef block. Feel free to quote me if needed, but I'll probably comment there anyway. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:07, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Message of apology

Hey there Ed, now without a doubt we did have a dispute several months back but I shouldn’t have kept that as a grudge against you, as I have said to many users I have by now learnt my lesson- long story short I apologise for my foolishness I should of posted it on the talk page and waited not just blitzed ahead. I hope we will be able to tie up the loose ends and continue to help with the never ending task of improving Wikipedia.

However, in my humble opinion I do think what cityofsilver said to you about me was rather cruel and cold.

“I don't know if anybody came across his previous blocklog or those (now-archived) discussions from July, but I feel like if that whole debacle had gotten brought up earlier, we wouldn't be talking about a mere 48 hours off”

Particularly since it was on the sole casus belli of “getting his own back” and it was rather upsetting someone could say that about me. At any rate, I have apologised to him and I am waiting for a response. As I stated on my talk page I am going to find a new mentor, since Zscout sadly doesn’t edit as much as he used to. Anyway , I hope you will be able to shake my hand and we can move on. Thanks :) Goldblooded (talk) 15:43, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the message. City of Silver's message was not cruel or cold, just mere fact – if Spartaz had seen your block log, I suspect your block would have been longer. I'm perfectly willing to move on, but you have to be civil at all times, not just after a block. You may be young, but that doesn't mean you can't be mature. :-) Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks ed, glad you acept my apology :) But yeah , you wouldnt think im 15, paticulary if you met me in real life; I guess its down to the simple fact i have had a tough upbringing (paticualry in my younger years)and instead of turning to drugs and drink , which tragicially (and foolishly) a lot of my peers these days do. i have instead turned to things like history and work in search of a better life :) Goldblooded (talk) 16:27, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

ANI

Hello. This message is being sent to inform you that there is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Thank you. CityOfSilver 21:16, 8 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 10 October 2011

This Month in GLAM: September 2011



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 17:26, 12 October 2011 (UTC)

ping

Email about FT. Tony (talk) 02:51, 17 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 17 October 2011

Got my book back!

Good news: I just got my book back! Nest weekend I'll start adding the second references as you asked. See you later! --Lecen (talk) 16:56, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds great, thanks Lecen! :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:38, 18 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Speedy deletion nomination of Iron Ore (Ishpeming, Michigan)

If this is the first article that you have created, you may want to read the guide to writing your first article.

You may want to consider using the Article Wizard to help you create articles.

A tag has been placed on Iron Ore (Ishpeming, Michigan) requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that this notice was placed here in error, contest the deletion by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". Doing so will take you to the talk page where you will find a pre-formatted place for you to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once tagged for speedy deletion, if the page meets the criterion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but don't hesitate to add information to the page that would render it more in conformance with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. andy4789 ★ · (talk? contribs?) 20:04, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Removing Speedy at Iron Ore (Ishpeming, Michigan)

Hi The ed17, you recently removed a deletion tag from Iron Ore (Ishpeming, Michigan). Because Wikipedia policy does not allow the creator of the page to remove speedy deletion tags, an automated program has replaced the tag. Although the deletion proposal may be incorrect, removing the tag is not the correct way for you to contest the deletion, even if you are more experienced than the nominator. Instead, please use the talk page to explain why the page should not be deleted. Remember to be patient, there is no harm in waiting for another experienced user to review the deletion and judge what the right course of action is. As you are involved, and therefore potentially biased, you should refrain from doing this yourself. Thank you, - SDPatrolBot (talk) 20:10, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, something I didn't know. Apparently page creators can remove PRODs but not CSDs. Oh well. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:14, 19 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Barnship

Barnship
For your collaboration with Tony1 on a story in the Signpost, "Brazil's boom-time dreams of naval power". This was a great way to let people know about your work! - Dank (push to talk) 14:02, 20 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dank, but I can't take much credit – Tony approached me, not the other way around :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Review, etc.

Hello, m'dear! I was wondering if you might do me a favor... I just sent my completely rewritten version of The Satanic Bible live, and was wondering if you might give it a once-over. I've quite literally never written an article about a book/film/anything requiring any type of plot summary, and am wondering if it is too in-depth. Thoughts?

I'll probably keep expanding the criticism and, if possible, influence sections... Then maybe see if I can go for a GA.

Hope things are well with you! :] – GorillaWarfare (talk) 01:15, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hello my beautiful ... gorilla of a friend. Yes, your suspicion is correct; the plot summary dominates the article too much. Are there any major themes prevalent in the book that can be spun into their own section? More influence/impact would be good too :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:44, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hrr, I wondered if that was going to be the case... The problem is that the whole book, particularly The Book of Lucifer, is sort of scattered and piecemeal, so I feel like I'm synthesizing if I just choose bits and pieces to summarize. I'll give condensing it a shot, though... Thank you! – GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:02, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome and good luck :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:25, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response

Thank you kind sir for seeing my potential , as indef blocking me wouldnt solve the siutation; chances are in the long run Wikipedia itself will be deprived of a decent, young editor. Something it soley needs.

It wasn't really a revert war since i didnt revert anything. It started off as me posting a query about his username and he deleted it and said it was rubbish/nonsense which i was a little annoyed about but i merely posted a new message asking him why he reverted it. He responded by plastering a rather strong toned message on my talk page (some of which i didnt actually understand or know how to interpret)and i was genuinelly offended by it and i said it was ironic he was pointing the sword at me (i was still perfectly polite) and i pointed out that himself had already been banned for 3RR, vandalism , annoying others and also about his username (he was even indef banned) and i urged him to stop this madness otherwise it will be both our downfall, and i ended the message with something he put on my page; there is no further discussion. Thus ending the matter.

However, for one reason or another he decided to report an already closed matter breaching WP:LETGO or even WP:DEADHORSE and further fueling the aready tense situation, and making an unessarary judgement. Could you point out the exact source of what i did wrong, or better still what would you of done if you were in my shoes?

On a more important issue, I absolutely can interact with other editors , provided they wish to interact with me. If you check my contribs i have welcomed and assisted new recruits (which in my opinion are the most important aspect of wikipedia since without them wikipedia will soon become useless) and its rather sad that some more experienced members trample on them (as i was when i was new) or help them for the sake of furthering their own prestige. Also i have been encouraging retired members to rejoin wikipedia, most notably User talk:Barts1a and i was helping him resolve a dispute he had with another editor (which caused him to quit in protest/disgust) diplomaticially and encouraging him to move on.

I have also made good relations with my mentor, Lionel who i get on very well with; along with other editors who i am great friends with, notably User:Σ and User:Jasper Deng whom have helped me (and i have helped) to progress in wikipedia. User:Goldblooded (Return Fire) 20:37, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

P.S. And also , you might be interested to know that while i was up for editor review i received some paticulary good reviews;

"Your contributions to articles and the patrolling of new pages seems to be very good work (I say this as someone who's knowledge of European history post Roman Empire is 95% from Wikipedia). However, you seem to be taking an overly combative tone in your edit notes when fixing vandalism or POV issues; for instance "(Undid revision 455580990 by Candi81 (talk) Dont vandalise pages)" when simply saying "reverted vandalism" would have worked. While diplomacy can be difficult, you should try to resolve it yourself as much as possible, rather than involving a third party (but that is not always possible, and the very fact that you can see when there is a dispute is an excellent thing).

You seem to take care to copy-edit the articles, but you are much more haphazard elsewhere (edit notes, this page, etc.). (Incidentally using "+" instead of "and" is something that grates on many a raw nerve, including mine.) Overall your mistakes are small and easy to correct, and your contributions many and excellent, so keep up the good work"

User:Goldblooded (Return Fire) 20:41, 22 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry

Ed, I'm deply sorry but I'm out of free time. I'm having some issues here at Wikipedia that are demanding my full attention. I'm not even able to work on my articles. But dont worry, I won't let you down. Just give me some time. --Lecen (talk) 20:14, 23 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm in the same boat – have you seen my [very limited] contributions lately? I still haven't even been able to finish the Milhist newsletter, and it's almost the end of the month. :/ Whenever you can get to it is fine by me. Thanks for letting me know what's up though! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:23, 24 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 24 October 2011

New Page Patrol survey

New page patrol – Survey Invitation

Hello The ed17! The WMF is currently developing new tools to make new page patrolling much easier. Whether you  have patrolled many pages or only a few, we now need to  know about your experience. The survey takes only 6 minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist us in analyzing the results of the survey; the WMF will not use the information to identify you.

  • If this invitation  also appears on other accounts you  may  have, please complete the  survey  once only. 
  • If this has been sent to you in error and you have never patrolled new pages, please ignore it.

Please click HERE to take part.
Many thanks in advance for providing this essential feedback.

You are receiving this invitation because you  have patrolled new pages. For more information, please see NPP Survey. Global message delivery 13:33, 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) 02:53, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on the Bugle for a Signpost article. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to WikiProject Military History. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Multiple editors will have an opportunity to respond to the interview questions. If you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 03:45, 30 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

WikiCup 2011 October newsletter

The 2011 WikiCup is now over, and our new champion is Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions), who joins the exclusive club of the previous winners: Dreamafter (2007), jj137 (2008), Durova (2009) and Sturmvogel_66 (2010). The final standings were as follows:

  1. Zanzibar Hurricanehink (submissions)
  2. Australia Sp33dyphil (submissions)
  3. Greece Yellow Evan (submissions)
  4. Principality of Sealand Miyagawa (submissions)
  5. Ohio Wizardman (submissions)
  6. Scotland Casliber (submissions)
  7. Canada Resolute (submissions)
  8. Russia PresN (submissions)

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

No prize was awarded for featured pictures, sounds or portals, as none were claimed throughout the competition. The awards will be handed out over the next few days. Congratulations to all our participants, and especially our winners; we've all had fun, and Wikipedia has benefitted massively from our content work.

Preparation for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Interested parties are invited to sign up and participate in our straw polls. It's been a pleasure to work with you all this year, and, whoever's taking part in and running the competition in 2012, we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn and The ed17 00:50, 1 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 31 October 2011

This Month in GLAM: October 2011



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 06:11, 2 November 2011 (UTC)

Bugle suggestions

I saw your note about the bugle in your contributions section just now. For what its worth, I would make the following suggestions:

You could feature an Academy piece or help/how to guide once a month, that could be useful to the readers. I recall raising a suggestion some time back to add a section to our newsletter that would serve as a sort of "around the world" section by displaying article from other projects that share a task force with us just so members with interests in the area can scoop out the goings on for their task forces of interest from the other project that co-runs the given TF (for example, a story from WP:US about the release of old documents form the library of congress, or a story from WP:AIRCRAFT about internships at boeing, or a story from WP:JAPAN about military relief efforts related to the earthquake, etc). We could also consider (and this is something of a long shot I admit) creating cartoon section so our readers can view the funnies, though I confess this doesn't really further our project letter much. TomStar81 (Talk) 08:31, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Tom! Long time no see. A 'how to' guide would be nice. I think that the op-ed section would currently take these (think MRG's editorial) but I suppose making a formal division would make people realize we will take these sorts of articles. Hmm. More things to ponder. The "around the world" is not a bad idea, but the task forces aren't really there for groupings nowadays, and I'm afraid of straying into pure news – I'd rather have the time-limited Bugle writers focus on Wikipedia-related material. ;-) I suppose we could do links of to news articles related to current military events, though... another thing to ponder. If someone was willing to draw the cartoons, I'd take it. It would add something other than text (and something that the Signpost doesn't even have!). Know anyone who might be interested? :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Before September I would recommend bahamut0013 since he was the one who did our titan cross awards, but since he is doing his marine duties in Elysium these days the first person who would come to mind would be the user who created wikiptan. Perhaps in the interest of openness we should hold a contest among the active contributors to see who can come up with the best design submission. Also, one other thought occurred to me for my bugle suggestions: listing open milhist-related articles up at either the reward board or the bounty board. If you guys take the contest route I may endevour to locate a scanner so I can upload an image submission of my own. On an unrelated note I emailed MBK004 to see how he has been lately, but as of yet I haven't got a reply. TomStar81 (Talk) 06:48, 5 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Mabeenot's talk page.
Message added 20:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Mabeenot (talk) 20:33, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

NARA prizes for WikiCup participants

Hi Ed. Since you've done a lot of work that relied on National Archives documents and you're involved with the WikiCup, I was wondering if I might be able to get your take on my idea at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup#Cooperation with WP:NARA. Thanks! Dominic·t 21:14, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

EF

Dear Ed17,
Can you please have a look at this, and, especially at that.
Thank you in advance.--Paul Siebert (talk) 22:45, 3 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

TPS'ers

Greetings to my esteemed peers, followers, subscribers, creepers, generally interested editors, and students in the USEP class. I'm going to be mostly offline for the next several days to catch up on schoolwork and do some exciting research in my university's archives on an 1895 strike in Ishpeming, Michgan. Theoretically this means I won't be on-wiki, but I'll probably end up checking my talk page once a day or so. Please be patient if I don't immediately reply, and have a great week. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:52, 7 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 7 November2011

welcome-personal

I saw that you reverted my edits to Template:Welcome-personal, but you didn't provide an edit summary, so I would like know why mentioning adopt-a-user is bad. Thank you and happy editing! pluma Ø 02:09, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

We need to keep extraneous text to a minimum or people won't read it. We want a warm welcome and just a bit of introduction, with links to where they can learn more. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:04, 9 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I thought it was good to introduce Adopt-a-User, because it prevents new users feeling discouraged about not knowing what to do. I wish I had been mentored because it took me a while to figure out everything just by seeing other users doing it. I definitely don't think it was extraneous. How about having the Welcome message look like it does here. That way, it doesn't take up very much space or reading time, so they will probably read it. If you want to make any changes, feel free to. Tell me what you think so that I can change the template. Happy editing! pluma Ø 02:55, 13 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Request to help close RSN dispute

May I request you to please participate in closingthis reliable sources dispute. I request that the arguments be considered on its merits alone. I would like to point out that both sides of the argument feel that retaining/removing the source is important as regards NPOV. Indo-Pakistan disputes are often avoided by editors who hate being drawn into the hassle but we need experienced and dedicated neutral parties to participate, otherwise the augean stable can never be cleaned out. This corner of WikiProject Military History needs people to clean it up. The only way to do it is first of all kill non-reliable sources. (Disclaimer: I am an involved party and I approached you due to your prominent track record in WikiProject Military History). AshLin (talk) 11:39, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit confused. Is a reliable sources discussion meant to come to a judgement or can it be closed without decision? I had meant that we needed someone to kill the issue one way or the other, a reliable neutral editor to decide the merits of the case. It may be that I have mis-communicated to you. We were looking for resolution, not just for closing the arguments which had ceased anyway. AshLin (talk) 19:48, 12 November 2011 (UTC).[reply]
(edit conflict) I've closed the discussion. It's pretty clear what the consensus is, and WP:SPS supports it. See "Pakdef is clearly unreliable per my reading of this discussion and WP:SPS. Note that I was asked to close this due to (I think?) my position as a coordinator of WP:MILHIST." at WP:RSN#Pakdef.info. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:49, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I missed seeing the little box to the right. My bad. Thanks for the trouble. AshLin (talk) 20:51, 12 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 14 November 2011

Mail
Hello, The ed17. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

--Wehwalt (talk) 22:57, 15 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I've replied. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:36, 16 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

RSN you concluded

Hi, I was a party to this RSN you concluded [5]. I was referred by the user TheBushranger to contact either you or User talk:MilborneOne for the matter, however User talk:MilborneOne did not reply and you, being informed by another editor, finally concluded the discussion. I think you should take into view some important facts (regardless of the conclusion and the reliability of the source in question) because it seems to be resulting in certain bias and disruptive editing. Instead of rewriting, I'll quote my request to User talk:MilborneOne here for you to consider it (since he didn't respond and you were the concluding admin):

Hi, can you conclude the discussion[6] based on information provided (and verifying it) by both sides in discussion on consensus building. I guess you should take into consideration the massive canvassing being involved to tilt the discussion and its consequences. The User:dBigXray has posted a lot of repetitive comments calling in users sharing his POV [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] (and many other places - I've lost count, one of the Indian project notice board was also there I guess). Another involved user, User:Swift&silent, who already has once been a sock-puppet suspect [12] and warned for editwars & vandalism related to the similar issues [13] [14] [15] is indulged in the same. A few other editors are being re-quoted in this consensus building from one of the previous inconclusive reviews of the cite also seem to be a tag team/canvassed as pointed out by another user in the same discussion as well as the canvassed editors I gave proofs for are now fully participating. I'm sure User:DBigXray would reply to this with my valid posts like informing the already involved editors labeling that as canvassing (probably including this one). In such conditions I'll like you to act in administrative capacity to handle the related issues and damage caused to the discussion without which it might be hard to resolve. Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 19:49, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think you can see the clear canvassing that resulted in tilting the discussion and has been affecting the related articles apart from the source in question as well. A timely response would be appreciated. Thanks. --lTopGunl (talk) 11:59, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I left a message for DBigXRay. There's no need to name S&S as "once a suspected sockpuppet" if the case has concluded and found that he was not... Even with canvassing, I'm confident the right decision was made here. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:53, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, yes, I did not object to the conclusion of the article but the on going disruption. Thanks. I hope he takes your message as a chance to refrain instead of doing it again and getting on the offensive again. --lTopGunl (talk) 19:32, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Response to comment my Talk page

Neither of you look good coming out of this; you both have areas you can improve upon. All I ask is that you personally refrain from canvassing in the future. If others are using Pakdef, you are well within your rights to remove it, citing the RSN discussion in the edit summary. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:03, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Future of the US Education Program and the Ambassador Project

There is a discussion about the future and the growth of the US education program along with the future of the Wikipedia Ambassador Project here. Voceditenore (talk) 06:37, 18 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Windy City

A note to my talk page stalkers and anyone else who visits this page – I'm going to be in Chicago with tenuous (at best) internet connections until Tuesday, followed by the annual family gathering for Thanksgiving on Wednesday/Thursday, so please be patient with me getting back to messages left here. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:38, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

10th Single Infantry Battalion (Estonia)

The ed17,

Article: 10th Single Infantry Battalion (Estonia).

I came across the above article in the "Category:Military history articles with incomplete B-Class checklists". It goes to the talkpage of the above article once clicked on. Then if you click on the "Article" link it goes too Maavägi and says it's a "(Redirected from 10th Single Infantry Battalion (Estonia))". Honestly, I don't know what to do about it, since I've come across other articles over the last few days with duplicate talkpages, so I've requested them as a deletion. Then on my last one, the Admin suggested it to be redirected and he reverted all the deleted talkpages and redirected them. Would you be able to take the time to have a look when you have time? I would appreciate it, it would be one less article in the "B class" section for us. Adamdaley (talk) 07:58, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Will do this asap. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:52, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
My understanding is that talk pages can be deleted if no pages link to them (see Special:WhatLinksHere). Worst case is it can simply be redirected and the talk page will be removed from the category. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

"Mark Satin" bio up for second FA review

This is to let you know that my thoroughly revised Mark Satin biography has just gone up for a second FA review, Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mark Satin/archive2. It would not be the article it is today without your kind but firm message about my need to use the proper typefaces on the editing screen (I was a Wiki neophyte). I hope you'll take another look at it, I think you'll like what I've done. - Babel41 (talk) 21:41, 19 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I will try to do this soon, please remind me if I forget. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:52, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Ed, thanks for your note. Not to bug you, but it's been over a week now so I am afraid you may have forgotten. Best, - Babel41 (talk) 19:31, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Oh goodness, I missed this message. Babel, I will do my best to review this, but there's no guarantees. It's my 21st birthday today with two papers due this week (one in seven hours!) and finals next week. Real life is kicking my butt right now. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:43, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A quick check please

Could you look over this section to ensure that I have not made any solecisms regarding the war, the famously sunken ship, or other events? Mind you, I am trying to be as short as possible, the article is already too long.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:18, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm at a Model UN conference atm, will try to check this tonight. Worst case I will look at it tomorrow. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:51, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
No hurry. Thank you.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:03, 20 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I actually did get to this tonight, haha.
  • What revolt? I don't believe you mention it before – I think a link should be enough.
  • Where is Beer in the bibliography?
  • The last paragraph needs a citation.
  • Milhist-wise it looks good to me. It's a pretty good summary of a Milhist topic that still focuses on the person you're writing about. Nice work. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:03, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I'll clear those things up. I forgot Beer? Well, he's by far the least useful of Hanna's three biographers. That is what I am trying to do, to make sure the reader knows about these events, which are crucial to Hanna. I'm trying to do it in a way so that the casual reader, who has heard of Mark Hanna can understand these political events, but keep Hanna's role in there (or failing that, McKinley's) sharply in focus.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:32, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
One more thing: is it pro-war or jingoism? I think it was the latter, but I'm not sure. I can agree on Beer; early-1900s non-fiction tend to not be the most useful sources. ;) It looks very good to me now. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:59, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I would prefer to avoid the "jingoism" term because it carries connotations with it.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:09, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That's understandable. I just wanted to be sure. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:18, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Thx for your work. Could you also glance at the one paragraph on Hanna's rather minimal participation in the Civil War?--Wehwalt (talk) 09:53, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Will do asap. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Looks mostly good, except that the National Guard wasn't formally created until much later. Were you talking about one of the state-organized units? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:12, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I suppose. The source used the term.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:19, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the regiment's name was a nickname for one of the units listed at List of Ohio Civil War units? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:42, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Not certain. I shall have to look into the matter though. I will check my sources and look online.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:46, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Good luck. Please ping me when the article goes to FAC! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Arizona FAC

When you get a chance, can you put the newspaper cites into the appropriate template to address Nikimaria's point about not mixing templated and untemplated citations?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:44, 21 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I should get to this tonight. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:50, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This is now done. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 21 November 2011

Done!

I'm really, really sorry for having taken so long to add the extra sources to South American dreadnought race. They are all there now. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 00:19, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I did say there was no necessary timeline, so don't worry! Was there any information specific to Martins Filho that doesn't appear in the article? If not, I think I can finally stop bugging you. ;-) Thanks so much, Lecen. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:03, 23 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Unfortunately, I saw nothing of fantastic that you could add to the article itself, unless you have any desire to lose focus and start talking about Brazilian domestic politics in that time, which you obviosly don't. Don't worry about bothering me. If you ever need me, feel free to ask, I really don't mind helping you. Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 15:57, 29 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Category:USS Triton (SSRN-586)

Happy Thanksgiving, Ed17! I hope all is well with you and yours. Could you look into the deletion of this category, and the stand-up of a category for Triton class submarines? I think keeping Category:USS Triton (SSRN-586) is not an example of over-categorization since it captures a number of subjects unique to the USS Triton while this new Category: Triton class submarine is not only redundant but actually misleading since there is another Triton-class submarine, namely the British T class submarine. I created a disambiguation page named Triton class that handles this situation much better and more consistently. Thanks! Marcd30319 (talk) 15:14, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As I mentioned on CfD, the Triton class submarine cat is up for renaming to Triton class submarine (1958) to remove the ambiguity. :) - The Bushranger One ping only 20:27, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
...which has been opposed by the above? sigh! - The Bushranger One ping only 20:37, 24 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
This renaming of the Triton class submarine category was initiated because of the British T class submarine situation which was accommodated by Triton class disambiguation page. So, in order to contort this discussion into the direction that the administrator wants, we are not only going through the speedy deletion of a perfectly utilitarian USS Triton category while the ignoring of an equally utilitarian disambiguation page, but we must also go through renaming of the Triton class submarine category that did not adequately address the British T class submarine situation when it was initially created. I happen to belive in economy of effort, and I think this total process to be a needless expediture of effort to no great purpose. Look, I know how things work, and how Wiki-admin will almost always get their way but as the contributor who actually guided USS Triton (SSRN-586) to its A-class status, I would hope for a more collaborative approach. Marcd30319 (talk) 13:07, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry you see things this way; nobody is speedy-deleting anything (once I became aware of the facts behind the case, I struck the speedy-delete-as-recreation suggestion). However I'm not exactly sure why you have a problem with renaming Category:Triton class submarines, which, as you point out, is ambigious at its current location - and the T class submarine has its own category at Category:British T class submarines - and I'm also a bit confused as to how the disambiguation page comes into this? The existiance of a disambiguation page, and its contents, doesn't affect the fact that ambiguous category names should be disambiguated. - The Bushranger One ping only 13:18, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I replied yesterday, but I guess Wikipedia's servers ate it or something? Anyway, Marc -- I've got a cold or the flu, so this Thanksgiving has been interesting. Otherwise it's been pretty good, and I hope yours went well! Now, Marc, disambiguation pages are different from the categories. I agree that the categories should be modified to avoid ambiguity, but (this is directed more towards Bushranger) I'm curious why we are using [Category:Triton class submarines (1958)] rather than [Category:USS Triton (SSRN-586)]. We (should) only have articles on the ship in single-ship classes except in odd circumstances (eg. Almirante Latorre-class battleship), so why are we reversing that for categories? Why not follow the example of USS Nautilus (SSN-571)? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:49, 25 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well...I'll be completely honest, I was unaware there was precedent for single-ship categories. I was basing this on Category:Bainbridge class cruisers et. al. where single-ship classes were classed as "by class". If there's clear precedent for by-ship categories, I'll happy trout myself here! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 00:54, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, for battleships there's Category:Unique battleships for single-ship classes, which actually seems like a good idea. Should we continue that for submarines, making subcategories (eg. the Triton category) for those that include more article than just the submarine in question? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:58, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
That would seem to be the most logical way to do it, I reckon, assuming "Bar class foofighters" isn't followed for one-and-dones. - The Bushranger One ping only 01:31, 26 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, we may want to ask WP:SHIPS about it. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:30, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Ping

Hello, The ed17. You have new messages at Ian Rose's talk page.
Message added 14:11, 27 November 2011 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.[reply]

Thanks

Always nice to see a friendly face on CHU. MBisanz talk 15:37, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, thanks! I went through a series of autoblocks after my friends found that they could get me blocked by vandalizing on the computer next to me. They got bored relatively quickly, but it was still stressful to explain the scenario to various administrators who handled my unblock requests. Regards, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:28, 27 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

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) 08:52, 28 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 28 November 2011

Mail call

Hello, The ed17. Please check your email; you've got mail!
It may take a few minutes from the time the email is sent for it to show up in your inbox. You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{You've got mail}} or {{ygm}} template.

This Month in GLAM: November 2011



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here.

Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 13:16, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Why on earth are you reading this message when you should be celebrating your 21st birthday?

'nuff said. Enjoy! BencherliteTalk 15:04, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Oh trust me, I probably won't be on again today or tomorrow, hahaha. Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Shit, I forgot your birthday? /me slinks away in shame. (Hope you had a great one, anyway!)sonia♫ 07:33, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A beer for you!

Happy 21st! <3

Now go write your papers. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 15:49, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Happy Birthday !!! I hope your head feels OK :) :) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you both! My head's fine right now but that might change later. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:54, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Then you did it wrong ;) Good luck with those papers - what are you writing on? Parsecboy (talk) 20:01, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Happy Big 21! Life flies, doesn't it? Buggie111 (talk) 23:24, 5 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I survived the night. It was pretty awesome, minus the parts I spent sick that I don't remember. Thank you all. Parsec - I'm writing on an 1895 miners strike in Ishpeming, MI for one class and the Byzantine-Ostrogothic relationship in the late 400s for another. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:23, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I reserve the right to block you if your drunk-Wikipedia-ing gets out of hand :P – GorillaWarfare (talk) 19:54, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Back at you. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:04, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Deal. – GorillaWarfare (talk) 20:09, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
K. I'll be keeping an eye on you. ;) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:16, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I seem to recall writing a good chunk of my first draft for Juno Beach while slightly intoxicated. It passed GA w/ colours flying :P (and yes, this is an unofficial notice that I'm back for a while. I'm in exams, my roommate is playing the xbox, and I'm consequently bored out of my mind. I'll be back until the 20th for sure). Cam (Chat)(Prof) 20:50, 7 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Signpost: 05 December 2011

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:The_ed17&oldid=464634230"