User talk:Hawkeye7/Archive 2015: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Browse history interactively
← Previous editNext edit →
Content deleted Content added
VisualWikitext
EdwardsBot (talk | contribs)
354,693 edits
Line 1,341: Line 1,341:
</div>
</div>
<!-- EdwardsBot 0274 -->
<!-- EdwardsBot 0274 -->

== Congratulations again... again! ==

{| style="border: 2px solid lightsteelblue; background-color: whitesmoke;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:WPMH ACR (Swords).png|90px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |&ensp;'''The ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Awards#A-Class_medals|Military history A-Class medal with swords]]'''''&ensp;
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid lightsteelblue;" | In recognition of your continued outstanding article work, you are hereby awarded the A-Class Medal with Swords for the articles [[Kenneth Nichols]], [[Alsos Mission]] and [[Battle of Goodenough Island]], promoted to A-Class between March and May 2012. On behalf of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, [[User:Ian Rose|Ian Rose]] ([[User talk:Ian Rose|talk]]) 15:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
|}

Revision as of 15:26, 25 May 2012

Archive
Archive

Archives:

2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011


Alexander the Great edition triple laurel crown

Your majesty, I am pleased to award the coveted Alexander the Great edition triple laurel crown to Hawkeye7. This special award recognizes the rare editor who contributes at least 15 pieces of Featured content, 15 Good articles, and 15 "Did you know?" entries. Thank you for your contributions to the project! SMasters (talk) 06:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your hard work on Military related articles which would have been left untouched for the years to come. Bidgee (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

The Barnstar of Awesomeness
Awarded to Hawkeye7, as part of AustralianRupert's 2012 New Year Honours List, in recognition of their work on several highly visible topics throughout 2011. Thank you and keep up the good work! AustralianRupert (talk) 10:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for assessing the various biographical articles that I have been working on. Dormskirk (talk) 11:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

Hi, I'm with the Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2011. I've been working on the Olympic marmot as part of a project, and now, multiple reviewers have told me that it's ready to be reviewed for GA! I nominated it, but TCO suggests to recruit reviewers to facilitate the process, and he directed me to you and a few other users. I would like to ask if you weren't too busy, to do the GA review for the Olympic marmot. I'd really appreciate it! I'm going to ask a few of the other names he gave me about this too, and whoever has the time to get to it first can review it. Thanks! Imthebombliketicktick (talk) 17:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Battle of Bardia

This is a note to let the main editors of Battle of Bardia know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 3, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 3, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Australian troops enter Bardia.

The Battle of Bardia was fought over three days between 3 and 5 January 1941, as part of Operation Compass in the Second World War. Australian Major General Iven Mackay's 6th Division assaulted the strongly held Italian fortress of Bardia, Libya, assisted by air support and naval gunfire, and under the cover of an artillery barrage. The 16th Infantry Brigade attacked at dawn from the west, where the defences were known to be weak. This allowed the infantry and 23 Matilda II tanks of the 7th Royal Tank Regiment to enter the fortress and capture all their objectives, along with 8,000 prisoners. In the second phase of the operation, the 17th Infantry Brigade exploited the breach made in the perimeter. On the second day, the 16th Infantry Brigade captured the township of Bardia, cutting the fortress in two. On the third day, the 19th Infantry Brigade advanced south from Bardia, supported by artillery and the Matilda tanks. Meanwhile, the Italian garrisons in the north surrendered to the 16th Infantry Brigade and the Support Group of the British 7th Armoured Division. The victory at Bardia enabled the Allied forces to continue the advance into Libya and ultimately capture almost all of Cyrenaica. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philippines campaign (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Blamey

G'day, Hawkeye, I'm currently working on expanding the 2nd Battalion (Australia) article offline. In relation to Thomas Blamey, I've come across this in Bean (vol 6, 1942, p. 193): "short term in command of the 2nd Battalion and 1st Brigade". Currently the AWM's article [1] on the 2nd Battalion only provides an incomplete list of battalion commanders (I've managed to find at least four, when they currently only have two), and it doesn't list Blamey. Nor does the AWM timeline for him mention a battalion: [2] I'm just wondering if in the course of your research for the wiki article you came across anything that confirmed that it was the 2nd Bn that he commanded and it had any dates of when Blamey was in command. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I've found it in the article now. Apologies, I should have read it closer. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Greetings

Hi Hawkeye. I don't think we've met before, but I see you are working on the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, an article that has interested me for a long time. The current arbitration case is emotionally charged. I've been through a lot of cases User:Jehochman/Arbitration, and my unsolicited, possibly unwelcomed advice is that you should either strenuously defend yourself, or else admit failures. If you decide to admit failures you can either pledge to learn from mistakes and not repeat them, or you can resign if you don't want to deal with the stresses of being an admin. Any of those paths will lead to a better result than letting people demonize you without hearing your side of the story. The current discussion is making me feel uncomfortable, like you might get over-sanctioned for any errors. Best regards, Jehochman Talk 16:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou for you advice. It is hard to know how to handle these things. I originally thought that it would be straightforward to fix up the article, which looked fairly good, but has turned out that there are a number of books referenced without page number, and blocks without references. I have added two more sections. A third, on the legacy of the bombings, is needed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jeremy Doyle

The DYK project (nominate) 23:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Gday Hawkeye. There seems to be a named ref that is missing some info at Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (# 113 - <ref name="Generals"/>). From going back through the article history it looks like it might be the fol:

{{cite web| title = The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II, A Collection of Primary Sources| publisher=[[George Washington University]]| date = August 13, 1945| format = PDF| work=National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 162| url = http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/72.pdf| coauthors = General Hull Colone Seazen}}

Do you know if this is right? I didn't want to just add it without checking. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. Fixed it, and a couple of other refs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Great, thanks again. Anotherclown (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Douglas MacArthur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Supreme Commander (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

Request for evidence at Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence

As you blocked Malleus in 2011, would you please respond to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence#Requests for further evidence - Collaborative evidence collectionrcement/Evidence. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Canberra Capitals

Hi. :D Hola! :D I'm working on some articles on my user space about members of the Canberra Capitals. When I get them to DYK length, I'd like to move them over to the main space and if you could nominate them for DYK, that would be awesome. ;)

Drafts that are close to being ready and need a copy edit before a move and nomination:

--LauraHale (talk) 09:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence/Blocks

In the course of an ongoing case, the Arbitration Committee has decided to collect all relevant information regarding Malleus Fatuorum's block log and, as such, has created a table of all blocks, which can be found here. Since you either blocked or unblocked Malleus Fatuorum, you are welcome to comment, if you wish. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012


John Scanlon/Scanlan

Hi there, I've noticed you have tidied up my recent expansions on a couple of articles relating to Aussie generals so I thought I would raise this matter with you. In working on the expansion of the John Scanlon article, I realised the page was created with incorrect spelling of the surname (it should be Scanlan as per the references). I have created a new page - John Joseph Scanlan (soldier) - and turned the original page/talk page into redirects but perhaps the original page should be deleted altogether given the spelling of the surname? Apologies if this matter should be raised another way. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 10:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Looks very good. What you should do now is submit the article to Template talk:Did you know. If you would prefer, I can nominate it for you. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I don't know much about the DYK process so I will leave that up to you if you don't mind. Cheers! Zawed (talk) 08:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Request barnstar

I know I was a pain in the ass, but I helped that MP article. May I please have a barnie like you gave to others?TCO (Reviews needed) 05:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct-Dec 2011

The Content Review Medal of Merit
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period October–December 2011, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Buggie111 (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Southeast Pacific Area

Hawkeye7, would you mind please reviewing my current writings at Panama Sea Frontier and give any advice on appropriate writing-up of the Southeast Pacific Area? Thanks for your help, Buckshot06 (talk) 22:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Looks good. I have taken the liberty of splitting it in two, so there are now separate articles on the Panama Sea Frontier and the Southeast Pacific Area. Hope this is okay. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Arthur S. Carpender (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Atlantic Fleet and Hydrographic
Southeast Pacific Area (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Balboa

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

Assessment of Point Class Cutter

Thank you for your assessment of the article Point class cutter that you provided; but I couldn't help notice that you assessed it as B class and then changed it to C class. I am curious about what caused you to change your mind and also what in your opinion could be done to the referencing to make it complete or better? I'm trying to learn here and not criticize. Thank you for any help or guidance you can provide. Cheers. Cuprum17 (talk) 02:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Another editor pointed out that two small sections were still uncited. My apologies for the confusion. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Overlooked those, Mate. I put them in; would you mind looking at it again and re-assess? Thanks. Getting late and I have to go to work in the morning...Have a nice day! Cuprum17 (talk) 03:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Re-assessed B-class. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Ping

Hey mate, did you notice this? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Alice Coddington

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Brigitte Ardossi

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Carly Wilson

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Singapore strategy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blue Danube (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:17, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nicole Hunt

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur S. Carpender

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for John Joseph Scanlan (soldier)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy Australia Day! Thank you for contributing to Australian content!

Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy your Australia Day and please continue your good work! LauraHale (talk) 01:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Congratulations

 The WikiChevrons 
Congratulations for being nominated as one of the military historians of the year for 2011 in recognition of your quality articles on high-profile subjects, including J. Robert Oppenheimer, Manhattan Project, Relief of Douglas MacArthur and Thomas Blamey. I am pleased to award you the WikiChevrons in recognition of this achievement. For the Coordinators, Nick-D (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Marianna Tolo

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lauren Jansen

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

DYK for Hannah Bowley

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Milne Bay ACR

G'day, Hawkeye, would you mind if I put myself down as a co-nom on the Milne Bay ACR? I've been meaning to nominate it, but have found myself caught up in trying to rework Colonial forces of Australia (it's been a big job as it was a large article lacking almost any references when I came to it). I'm not sure I will be able to take the lead on the ACR as work is getting pretty busy now (Feb is when we have the first platoons of the year march-in for training and then March we are out in the field), but I should be able to help out with some of the questions that might arise. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Please do. That would be great. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jessica Bibby

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Natalie Porter

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Campaignbox Battle for Australia

In regards to this comment, the template was sort-of my fault ;) I created the Battle of Australia article on which it was based before reading the historiography on this topic (the article looked like this at the time the template was created by Grant65 (talk · contribs)). I've since re-written the article, though it's still not very good. I'd support the template's deletion. Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Manhattan Project

In case you finished "watching" the discussion, I replied to your last on my page.--Reedmalloy (talk) 23:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Hawkeye7,


My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Support

I know it's difficult waiting for the arbcom case that's been put off twice. You're a great admin and a great writer. Let me know if I can help. - Dank (push to talk) 23:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

What should be in Campaign Box templates

Hi can you check the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#What should be in Campaign Box templates to check I have not misrepresented your comments. Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

96th Engineer Battalion

Hello, you may be interested in my edit of the 96th Engineer Battalion article you have largely contributed to. It is based on information that was on the ABC. AprilHare (talk) 01:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

"stewed most of the time"

I guess you're sick and tired of discussing that, but I'm not getting the "stewed" part in "who's apparently some sort of koala (ie a protected species who is stewed most of the time)". Are koalas literally stewed (when poached or hunted) or did you mean that as an euphemism for "drunk"? It looks like NYB interpreted it as the latter in the ArbCom proposed decision. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Where does NYB say that? - Dank (push to talk) 17:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
"referring to another editor as 'stewed most of the time' was highly inappropriate" ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
A google search for "stewed koala" found the more literal interpretation plausible as well [3]. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so NYB didn't say that it meant "drunk". - Dank (push to talk) 18:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
So, how do interpret a statement about a living human said to be "stewed most of the time"? ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

As you put it on your user page, Dank, Wikipedia is no place for humor. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited Operation Alsos, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages War Department and CIC (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you know help: Australian women water polo players

Hey! :D Do you remember how I did the Canberra Capitals and took every player on the current squad to WP:DYK? I'm drafting articles about the current Australia women's national water polo team 2012 Summer Olympics squad on my user space. I'm hoping to take these articles to WP:DYK in a week or two. (Trying to get pictures for the articles first.) If you could help improve the article drafts in my user space in preparation for eventually moving them to the main space, that would be fantastic. The articles I'm working on are:

At length
At length - Existing article merge
Not at length
Require merging DYK check elsewhere

They are all properly cited. They need help fixing the grammar, the flow, the organisation and possibly with information box info. If you can help improve them in my user space before they are eventually moved over and nominated, I would be happy to help give you credit on the DYK nomination. :) --LauraHale (talk) 02:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Reginald Pinney

I know it's not the most exciting of biographies, but the Sassoon link is hard to resist! I've made a few improvements based on your comments - please let me know if there's anything else you feel is missing. Shimgray | talk | 17:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

re Fascinating case

Thanks so much! Sure, lemme first get started on revamping the page with sourced info, and get back to you. — Cirt (talk) 21:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement closed

An arbitration case regarding Civility enforcement has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
  2. Thumperward (talk · contribs) is admonished for conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for failing to adequately explain his actions when requested by the community and Arbitration Committee.
  3. John (talk · contribs) is admonished for reversing another administrator's actions while said actions were under review through community discussion.
  4. Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from any page whose prefix begins with Wikipedia talk:Requests for Adminship. This remedy explicitly does not prevent him from !voting on RFA's; however, should his contributions to a specific request for adminship become disruptive, any uninvolved admin may ban him from further participation in that specific RFA. Further, Malleus Fatuorm is admonished for repeatedly personalizing disputes and engaging in uncivil conduct, personal attacks, and disruptive conduct.
  5. Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
  6. All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
  7. The imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies by the community is done on an ad hoc basis in the absence of clear documented standards. The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for such discussions. As a related but distinct issue, the community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.
  8. Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to the Administrators' noticeboard, or to Arbitration Enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions.

For the Arbitration Committee:
Mlpearc (powwow) 02:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Discuss this
  • I don't know how I feel about this... Like I said during the evidence collection phase. The actions taken against you rest entirely upon the notion, do we believe you when you said that you were aware of Malleus' FC comment. Does we believe your revised version of the events leading to the reblock or was your original statement binding? If you were unaware of Malleus' comment, then IMO the desysop is entirely appropriate---your rationale was way off. However, if you were aware of Malleus comment, then IMO the desysop is inappropriate (but your personal attack meritted a final warning.) So the question is, did you know or not? After the fact you said you did... and after 2 months to consider it and your contributions here to WP, I think we should have AGF that you did. ArbCOM let the merits of MF's positive contributions provide a shield against his transgressions, but yours don't seem to have been taken into as much consideration. Anyways, I hope you stick around and contribute productively to the community... you don't need the bit to be involved.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 15:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
    • I think ArbCom felt they had no choice to desysop you. That's not to say I think it was a fair or right or just remedy (like Balloonman, I can't decide how I feel about it), but once they arrived at the conclusion that you had acted improperly, ArbCom would look weak (in view of you having been admonished just a few months ago) if they didn't do something tangible. That said, I disagree with Balloonman that they didn't take into account your many excellent contributions as they did Malleus'—I think the absence of even any proposed remedy beyond the desysop shows that they recognise that, despite what may have been lapses in judgement in this and the Racepacket case, you are a valuable editor. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
      • I have no doubts. As I said to you at the time, you made a brave and correct decision. It would have been easy to sidestep action as the vast majority of your former colleagues did. You had the short straw thrust into your hand by the inappropriate action of the preceding Admin. involved in this saga, which only adds to the irony of the decision to single you out for exceptional treatment when in fact you deserved to be exonerated. Leaky Caldron 17:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
        • It was very unfortunate that the Racepacket case blew up again during this one. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:46, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hawkeye7, far as I'm concerned, Arbcomm was wrong to take the bit from you. @-Kosh► Talk to the Vorlons►Moon Base Alpha-@ 19:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I know it is little consolation for the loss of the bits, but you did much more to try to uphold WP:CIV than our pusillanimous Arbitrators. Wehwalt (talk) 12:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hawkeye7. You have new messages at Talk:Operation Alsos/GA1.
Message added 06:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

→Στc. 06:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Nicholas Haussegger

Thanks a lot for your quick B-class review of Nicholas Haussegger. However, the WPMILHIST is still marked stub. If you could fix that, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

  • Sorry. Fixed that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:20, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Operation Alsos

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification

Hi. When you recently edited John Robinson (sculptor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jackeroo (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Gemma Beadsworth

The DYK project (nominate) 10:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

New Army website

Hi, As part of the long-overdue revamp of the Army website, almost all of the content from the Army History Unit's page has been removed! [4]. This includes the very-useful PDF versions of the papers from the Army history conferences they posted last year. Do you have any contacts in the AHU you could contact to see if they're planning on re-posting this material? (they no longer have a contact email for the AHU online). Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 06:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Rowena Webster

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Zoe Arancini

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Glencora Ralph

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Bugle op-ed?

Hi mate, as we haven't had any submissions yet for the March Bugle op-ed, it occurred to me that it'd be interesting to have one looking at MilHist (and perhaps WP as a whole) from the perspective of a professional historian such as yourself. Perhaps it might focus on the differing standards in terms of style, referencing, POV, etc, or something else again as you see fit. Anyway, if you'd like to do it, we'd ideally need the draft in under two weeks to make it into this month's edition, so let me know... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Any interest on this, mate? Perhaps expand and 'opinionate' the report you put in Project News? Up to you, just let me know... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Aaargh. I was hoping I could produce something on the long weekend, but was unable to do so. I can write up an expanded version of the report on Saturday. I promise to have that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you sir, I've added that to the op-ed page. Thanks, nice work, and good luck! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Belated tks from me too, mate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Just checking the Project News page, I was thinking when I suggested expanding and 'opinionating' the original AWM bit that the Op-Ed would, for this month's issue overall, replace rather than augment the Project News blurb, since the Op-Ed would be a superset of the news bit. Happy to go with majority opinion here so what do both of you think, Hawkeye/Ed? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Whichever way you prefer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

United States v. The Progressive

I think we should just gut the whole thing and start over, so your idea of making the body the new lead (for now) is a good one, to start, and once we're done expanding the subsections with new sourced info - we can rewrite the lede. Wanna split up the subsections? — Cirt (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

    • The idea was that anyone coming to the article would still find something in the meantime. The alternative would have been to create the new version in user space.
    • For the moment, I suggest that we keep a similar structure to what is there now:
      1. Background: nuclear weapons, the atomic energy acts of 1946 and 1954, development of the Teller-Ulam design, Morland writes his article for the Progressive
      2. Prior restraint: First Amendment, Free Speech in America, doctrine of Prior Restraint, Scientific American case, New York Times and other relevant cases
      3. Trial: The trials themselves, legal issues, in camera hearings, John Glenn, Chuck Hansen, the case is dropped
      4. Legacy:
    • Since I am a techno-military historian, I would like to write the Background section, and leave the Trial to you. Once I have finished the background I will start on the Prior Restraint section. Or, if you prefer, you can do that and we can converge on the Trial section. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd like to start on the Prior restraint stuff, in that particular article, that topic's probably my favorite of all. :) — Cirt (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I have finished the background section now, so I will be moving on to the Trial, starting with a paragraph on Morland and what he did. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for R Force

--Allen3 talk 17:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Teigan Van Roosmalen

The DYK project (nominate) 01:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Alicia McCormack

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 5

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

Battle of Goodenough Island (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Normanby Island and Cape Nelson
Gordon Grimsley King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Smith Family

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Henry Hardinge, 1st Viscount Hardinge

Many thanks for all the assessments you have done on the articles I have been seeking to improve. In the case of Henry Hardinge, 1st Viscount Hardinge I think you have kindly assessed the article as 'B' for mose wikiprojects but left it as 'start' for military history. Do you think you could please go back and have another look? Many thanks in anticipation. Dormskirk (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Victoria Brown (water polo)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kate Gynther

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Rebecca Rippon

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Melissa Rippon

Orlady (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Alicia McCormack

The reason for my deletions in this article are given on the talk page. The fact that the prince bowed to McCormack is not an event of sufficient notability to be in the introduction of an article about her life, even though it is a very good hook for the Wikipedia DYK. The fact of his bowing to her is still within the body of the article.

A hook doesn't need to be a really notable fact; it can be merely attention-getting. It is a journalistic, rather than an encyclopedic, device.

My other deletion was a bit of typically Australian journalistic ignorance- the use of a figure of speech "brought to his knees" with the added buzz of "literally"- in entirely the wrong context. Bowing has nothing to do with being brought to ones knees. The fact that some imbecile journalist wrote it doesn't make it necessarily stuff for inclusion in an encyclopedic article.

Amandajm (talk) 07:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Turner (water polo)

Orlady (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/List of field marshals of the British Army

Hey Hawkeye. Could you take another look at the above when you get a minute. :) Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington

Hi Hawkeye7 - I think I Have now sorted out the referencing for Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. Please could you take another look? Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 12:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for re-rating the article. Dormskirk (talk) 11:30, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 18

Hi. When you recently edited United States v. The Progressive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Energy (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:27, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The ALP's aversion to knighthoods

Hi there, Hawkeye7.

Some time ago I raised a question at Talk:Australian Labor Party#Position on titles, knighthoods etc. So far, nothing concrete has been forthcoming by way of a reliable source.

But I've just come across your post at Talk:John Northcott, which tells me my understanding is basically correct. But it's unsourced too. I'm wondering if you can contribute anything useful to my question at the ALP talk page? Cheers. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 08:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Butting in, I've responded at the ALP talk page with an RAAF source that I believe speaks directly to your query, Jack. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Ian. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

John Sherman Cooper

Just a note to let you know that John Sherman Cooper, an article you commented on when it was up for A-class review at WP:MILHIST, has now been nominated at FAC, if you would like to comment. Thanks. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations again!

 The Military history A-Class medal with swords 
In recognition of your continued outstanding article work, you are hereby awarded the A-Class Medal with Swords for the articles Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, Battle of Milne Bay and Frederick E. Morgan, promoted to A-Class between December 2011 and March 2012. On behalf of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, EyeSerenetalk 10:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing

Have a local brew
Thanks for reviewing 1740 Batavia massacre. You keep coming through for myself and Laura, so here is a local beer to pay you back. If you ever come my way (interesting military history here), rightfully expect a real one. Thanks! Crisco 1492 (talk) 10:31, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Admiralty Islands campaign

This is a note to let the main editors of Admiralty Islands campaign know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 26, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 26, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The first wave of US troops lands on Los Negros, Admiralty Islands, 29 February 1944

The Admiralty Islands campaign was a series of battles in the New Guinea campaign of World War II in which the United States Army's 1st Cavalry Division occupied the Japanese-held Admiralty Islands. Acting on reports from airmen that there were no signs of enemy activity and the islands may have been evacuated, General Douglas MacArthur accelerated his timetable for capturing the islands and ordered an immediate reconnaissance in force. The campaign began on 29 February 1944 when a force landed on Los Negros, the third largest island in the group. By using a small, isolated beach where the Japanese had not anticipated an assault, the force achieved tactical surprise, but the islands proved to be far from unoccupied. A furious battle developed for control of the Admiralties. In the end, air superiority and command of the sea allowed the Allies to heavily reinforce their position on Los Negros. The 1st Cavalry Division was then able to overrun the islands. The campaign officially ended on 18 May 1944. The Allied victory completed the isolation of the major Japanese base at Rabaul that was the ultimate objective of the Allied campaigns of 1942 and 1943. A major air and naval base was developed in the Admiralty Islands that became an important launching point for the campaigns of 1944 in the Pacific. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 23 March 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXII, March 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:14, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

AWM review

Really enjoyed reading about the meeting of the Australian War Memorial and MilHist Wikipedia. Do you know what their position is, regarding the use of their photo collection, to illustrate Wikipedia articles?--Rskp (talk) 03:10, 24 March 2012 (UTC)

GA Review Battle of Magdhaba

Really sorry, but I missed your review of this article, until today. I've made almost all the changes you request, but I guess its now out of date. What could the next step be? --Rskp (talk) 00:47, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

I will have look, and pass it if everything is okay. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:54, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Still some unresolved. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:19, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks a lot. I've reinstated a ref to the one water bottle which had been cut some time ago and changed the page number of the appendix from the online to the actual page number to conform with other refs. --Rskp (talk) 04:11, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
I've added the geo coords, and linked the war artist's name. Your article is promoted. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:06, 26 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you very much for the coords and most particularly, for promoting the article. Its been quite a saga. --Rskp (talk) 06:45, 26 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 March 2012

Admiralty Islands revert

Greetings, Hawkeye7. I see you reverted a good faith copyedit I made to the above. I do not see why, and have restored it. The paragraph reads cleaner as edited. If you'd like to discuss this, feel free. I do not expect to see another arbitrary revert. Yours. Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:32, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

Well, that's queer. I restored my edit, then posted the above. Returning to the Admiralty page there is no record of my restore, just your revert of your revert of my edit. I'm not sure what gives, but I hope that we can find some place to agree. If you'd prefer the last sentence to read something like "A furious battle for control of the Islands ensued," feel free. The phrase "the islands" having been repeated twice in the 1st sentence of that paragraph is what caught my eye and let to my edit. Cheers.Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:36, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
That's because I already restored it, so your doing so did not stick. If you'd like to do some copy editing, let me know. I have a stack of articles on softball that need attention. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:53, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
Pretty much I do drive-by edits. I read an article. I see something that needs clean-up, I make an edit, move on. After nearly 10,000 of them it becomes reflexive.
Softball? Sure. Where's your list? Cheers. Wikiuser100 (talk) 01:58, 27 March 2012 (UTC)
If you go to Jodie Bowering you can see the whole team in the template at the bottom of the page. All have been refurbished for the World championships. The ones that are red linked can be found via User:LauraHale, filed under "Softball to length, waiting picture"; they are are waiting for our wiki-photographer uploading a picture to commons. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:04, 27 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK assistance

Hi. An emergency came up and I have to go home to the USA tomorrow. I'll be unavailable/sporadically for the next 48 to 72 hours. If you could look after my DYK nominations (I think I have about 40 floating around at the moment) until then, that would be great. Any fixing, responding would be useful. : / --LauraHale (talk) 01:25, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:28, 28 March 2012 (UTC)

Thank you

RightCowLeftCoast has given you a cookie! Cookies promote WikiLove and hopefully this one has made your day better. You can spread the WikiLove by giving someone else a cookie, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past or a good friend.

This cookies are for assisting me in uploading a more detailed image of the DUI of the 185th Armor Regiment --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:00, 28 March 2012 (UTC).

To spread the goodness of cookies, you can add {{subst:Cookie}} to someone's talk page with a friendly message, or eat this cookie on the giver's talk page with {{subst:munch}}!

Please stop - just for a little while

Please stop nominating Olympian articles to DYK - or if you feel compelled - please state in the picture nominations that they can be posted without a picture. I appreciate the hard work Laura and yourself are putting into these articles, but there are practical reasons why this is a very disruptive process.

Firstly, you can only have one, maybe two, sports articles per queue. Furthermore, they can't all be about Olympians because sports are a very popular topic and you have to keep a sense of variety in DYK queues. (I'm pretty sure that's not a written rule but I know it's how DYK goes).

Secondly, you can only have a picture of a person (or a frog, or a building, etc. etc.) once every 4 queues. Again, we have the problem that if we just went through the Olympians every 4 queues there would be no space for other nominations with pictures of famous people.

I'm sure you can understand what a backlog this will create and that this is potentially a big problem for DYK and whilst I applaud your efforts I would ask you to consider letting some newbies and other community members have their moment in the spotlight. PanydThe muffin is not subtle 13:54, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

Firstly, unlike some people, every DYK article has been accompanied by at least one review, thus greatly reducing the backlog. So many other editors have been given a guernsey when their article might not have run. Other editors submitting blocks of articles like this have exploited a loophole to avoid reviewing anything.
Secondly, the presence of an image does not guarantee that it is used. The is DYK Supplementary Rule J6. The rule you are pretty sure is not written down most certainly is; it is J4. Select those you like; the others can run without their pictures.
Thirdly, this is all for now. Laura has departed for the US (see note above) so there will be no more articles for a while. I will be handling the ones on the queue. I wish I could help you by working on the prep areas, but regrettably I cannot.
Fourthly, I hope that it is appreciated that this has been a major cooperative effort by Wikimedia Australia and Softball Australia. Unfortunately, Jay had to turn down a similar offer from the Kookaburras.
Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:29, 30 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Khaled Ali - originally reviewed by LauraHale

Could you just put a final tick on the nom? It's been through a grueling review, was finally given approval by Nikkimaria, who made a few final edits to the article. Unfortunately, one introduced a factual error into the article and another removed a major point of the sentence. I pointed this out and subsequently corrected the two problems (not via undo, but by re-writing). Given the extremely long review, it would perhaps be a good idea to have a final green tick for the convenience of whoever does the promoting. Also, I revised my preferred hook, and listed the revision as ALT5. As for the hook points, it is the same as ALT3, so it doesn't need further checking, but probably adds to the rationale for adding another approval tick at the very end. Thanks in advance. Marrante (talk) 13:22, 2 April 2012 (UTC)

Done. Everything looks fine to me. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:43, 2 April 2012 (UTC)
Thank you. Marrante (talk) 12:39, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 April 2012

United States Education Program: Wiki-Project Management -- Interview Request

Hello Hawkeye7,

I am a student of Michigan State University working under Dr. Obar on an exploration of the Wikipedia adminship process. Thank you for volunteering to be a part of our project; we are glad that you have expressed interest in participating in our interviews of Wikipedia admins. I apologize for the lateness of this message, but if you are still willing to join in our work, please email me using Wikipedia's email function so that we can contact you formally.

Vert3x (talk) 15:00, 3 April 2012 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye!

Hi Hawkeye! Thanks for co-coordinating an event for WikiWomen's History Month! I am trying to gather information on a few things for a summary I'm writing about the month! It'd be great to know the following information, if possible:

  • How many participants did the event have?
  • How many new editors created accounts? (A list of editors would be awesome!)
  • Is it possible that all of the article and contribution outcomes can be shared on the WWHM outcomes page?

Any thoughts you can share about successes, participant experience, lessons learned, things one wishes they would have done differently, ways WMF and chapters can support these events, and so forth, would be wonderful. Thank you so much and all you do for improving women's representation and participation in Wikipedia. Sarah (talk) 19:25, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Roe v. Wade FAR

Hi Hawkeye! The Roe v. Wade FAR has been ongoing for a while and has been moved to the FARC section. It could use some comments on whether the article should be kept or delisted. Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 14:23, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Dispute resolution survey

Dispute Resolution – Survey Invite

Hello Hawkeye7. I am currently conducting a study on the dispute resolution processes on the English Wikipedia, in the hope that the results will help improve these processes in the future. Whether you have used dispute resolution a little or a lot, now we need to know about your experience. The survey takes around five minutes, and the information you provide will not be shared with third parties other than to assist in analyzing the results of the survey. No personally identifiable information will be released.

Please click HERE to participate.
Many thanks in advance for your comments and thoughts.

You are receiving this invitation because you have had some activity in dispute resolution over the past year. For more information, please see the associated research page. Steven Zhang DR goes to Wikimania! 23:25, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

National Association of Drug Court Professionals

Greetings, Hawkeye7. User:LauraHale left a note directing me to you in her absence. She had one issue with my DYK nomination, and it has been waiting for a decision for over a week. Would you be so kind as to take a look at it when you get an opportunity? Many thanks! Mgrē@sŏn 15:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

New article

G'day Hawkeye, in an attempt to kill off the main redlinks associated with the Bougainville Campaign, I quickly wrote Battle of Hellzapoppin Ridge and Hill 600A today. I don't have many American sources and my one Japanese source is largely silent on this battle (as it was relatively minor), so unfortunately the article is currently mostly sourced to just one main reference. I was wondering if you would mind taking a quick look at the article and (1) seeing if anything leaps out at you as being wrong and (2) if possible, adding one or two more sources (if you have them). Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 15:40, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

  • I made some minor additions and assessed the article as B class. I do have a couple of good additional sources, but cannot do anything for a few days. The only thing that leapt out at me was the reference to the "US High Command". Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:26, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
    • Cheers, I wasn't sure about that wording when I wrote it yesterday. I've reworded it now. Thanks for adding Tanaka. There's no rush with the extra refs, but I certainly appreciate any help you can give. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 23:07, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 April 2012

Disambiguation link notification for April 11

Hi. When you recently edited Vannevar Bush, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page B-18 (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:52, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks for the Template Info

Thanks for the template for showing public use of items prepared by the Institute for Heraldry (US Army). Maybe I'll be able to put some pretty pictures in my articles now. Lineagegeek (talk) 21:55, 11 April 2012 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review/Carrier Strike Group Seven/archive1

Would you consider commenting on this peer review? Buckshot06 (talk) 02:10, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Thanks

Thank you for assessing a number of my articles recently. Djmaschek (talk) 15:39, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

1740 Batavia massacre

Greetings Hawkeye7, this is a notice to let you know that 1740 Batavia massacre, which you have previously reviewed or copyedited, has been nominated at FAC. Should you be willing to review the article, feedback is welcome at the nomination page. Thank you. Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:52, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Help with women's national team articles

Clock has started ticking on these:

Please help. :( --LauraHale (talk) 07:14, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 April 2012

Your Wikichevrons

 The WikiChevrons 
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the first quarter of 2012, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. - Dank (push to talk) 02:31, 17 April 2012 (UTC)

Angie Ballard

Hi Hawkeye7. LauraHale suggested you might be interested in doing a GA review for Angie Ballard (Aussie wheelchair paralympian). No problem if you're not, and no rush if you are, but I agreed it was worth mentioning. --99of9 (talk) 11:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

Will do. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:31, 22 April 2012 (UTC)
All issues addressed I think. --99of9 (talk) 05:55, 24 April 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Harry Chauvel

This is a note to let the main editors of Harry Chauvel know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 25, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/April 25, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Harry Chauvel at Maribyrnong camp during the Citizen Military Force (CMF) in 1923

Harry Chauvel (1865–1945) was a senior officer of the Australian Imperial Force who fought at Gallipoli and in the Middle East during the First World War. He was the first Australian to attain the rank of lieutenant general and later general, and the first to lead a corps. The son of a grazier, Chauvel was commissioned in 1886 as a captain in a unit organised by his father. After seeing service during the 1891 Australian shearers' strike, he became a regular officer in 1896, and commanded a company of the Queensland Mounted Infantry in the Boer War. He commanded of the 1st Light Horse Brigade and later the 1st Division at Gallipoli. In March 1916, Chauvel became commander of the Anzac Mounted Division. He won victories at Romani and Magdhaba, and nearly won the First Battle of Gaza. At Beersheba in October 1917, his light horse captured the town and its vital water supply in one of history's last great cavalry charges. By September 1918, Chauvel was able to effect a secret redeployment of three of his mounted divisions and launch a surprise attack on the enemy that won the Battle of Megiddo. After the war, Chauvel was appointed Inspector General, the Army's most senior post. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 April 2012

Singapore strategy FAC

As you may have noted, I have struck my comments from this FAC as a response to [5]. While this is no reflection on you or the article, I feel that the acceptance that featured articles can be purchaased completely undermines the integrity of the FAC process. As such, I ant nothing to do with the process and ask that my comments be ignored.Nigel Ish (talk) 18:26, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Not everything you disagree with is vandalism.

This isn't vandalism either. You need to take more time over your reverts, reconsider your edit summaries, and assume good faith a bit more. Chaheel Riens (talk) 07:08, 26 April 2012 (UTC)

Battle of Wareo

G'day, Hawkeye, I'm not sure if you've seen the Battle of Wareo article yet. It was created earlier this month and has a bit of content, but needs work still, particularly the Aftermath and the lead. I've expanded the Background a little (hopefully an improvement), but was wondering if you could help out with the Aftermath. Not sure if you are interested, but if you are I'm sure the article would be greatly improved by your input. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:56, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

RAF Warwick

Hello Hawkeye7

Was the grading of the RAF Warwick for C-class related solely because of the lack of reference for the first paragraph of the based units section or was it something else?

Gavbadger (talk) 20:59, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Yes. It needs to be fully referenced to make B class. I used to give these a bit of leeway, but now that the C class has been created it seems wrong to do so. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:02, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXIII, April 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:11, 1 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 April 2012

Justin Bieber on Twitter

I appreciate the help with cleaning up that article. I noted a few more dead links on User_talk:Crisco_1492#Justin_Bieber_on_Twitter--there may well be more. Thank you, Drmies (talk) 20:46, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

  • There was only one dead link. I have removed it. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:53, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
    • [6]. [7]. Drmies (talk) 21:12, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
      • Telegraph link works fine for me. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:18, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
        • Odd--this morning (I tried twice) I got a 404. Drmies (talk) 22:22, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Aimee Murch

Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

Neither of those edits were vandalism and they should not have been reverted by you. Both articles should be deleted and are ridiculous entries in wikipedia. Also please have enough respect to sign your comments to my talk page. 24.235.129.212 (talk) 21:40, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

I didn't revert them. Two other editors did. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:53, 4 May 2012 (UTC)
Make that three. Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:02, 4 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Justin Bieber on Twitter

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 08:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lady Gaga on Twitter

PanydThe muffin is not subtle 08:03, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you tell me why you think Second Thirty Years War is bogus, please?

Please look at Talk:Second_Thirty_Years_War#Why_is_this_considered_bogus_and_why_is_it_still_stub_class.3F as I don't see either what more I'm expected to do, or how you can dispute the artcle?

Thanks to someone's help, every single book now has its ISBN. But if you'd looked at the Henig or Dray articles online, you'd see what I'm saying is true. Henig's article starts with the statement that every historian now accepts this, and Dray, building on F.W. Hiney's work shows how the abnormality of Hitler is the sole cause. They argue convincingly that had war broken out upto and including Munich, then you could argue for there being other causes, which might include a post-WW1 imbalance (which would lend credence to the 30 years war thesis). But after Munich then it must be Hitler alone, the 'Novus Actus Interveniens' in Rich's words. If you read these articles, you'll see what I've written is correct.

As I show, Bell convincingly shows that the mid-20s rapprochment under Stresseman, with the Treaty of Locarno and the proposed iron and steel cartel, meant that there was absolutely no reason why a second war MUST break out. So if Bell's right, then the 30 years war thesis is wrong. Ditto Henig, Dray, Goda, Rich, Weinberg, Broszat, Hildebrande, Hillgrubber etc.

Neither my ex-tutor nor any of my ex-fellow students who've seen the page think that there's anything wrong with it, all feeling it accurately represents the debate and the current state of the historiography.

So can you please tell me why you think its bogus? Which historians are you disagreeing with? Which statements require additional refernces? (Can't you just put a citation needed where required? I also re-wrote the Listen to Britain page last week which was in the film project. Someone suggested I move it to MilHist, which I did, and when I asked for reassessment, it was upgraded to a C, with 3 citations needed added. I did this - as well as totally rewriting the first section, thus adding another 3 books to the bibliography - and it was immediately upgraded to a B).

But if you don't tell me which historians you dispute or statements need citations, how am I meant to be able to improve the page?

You obviously can't be an expert on this subject or you wouldn't be disputing the latest historiography from the world's top historians. There is a consensus about this. The whole theory in effect comes solely from two comments. Foch saying the Treaty of Versailles was simply an armistice for 20 years and Churchill's introduction saying that both his histories should be seen as part of the same war.

Fritz Fischer's books in the 60s linked the German war aims, but this says more about German attitudes at the time, as the baby-boom generation were trying to challenge their parents' ideas of Hitler being an abherration and it not being their fault.

Likewise A.J.P. Taylor's book of the same period, Origins of WW2 was basically saying all Germans are bad, they've always been like this. Before he died, he basically disowned the book as one of his worst, and if you look in my bibliography, you'll see several differnt historian's who've written chapters in Martell's Origins of WW2 recondidered which is all about destroying Taylor's arguments.

But as shown, since the 80s the whole consensus has shifted against the 30 yrs war thesis. If you feel it needs extra refences, why can't you just add citation neeeded as normal?

And if you don't know enough about the subject to be aware of the historiography of the last 30 years, how can you claim it is bogus? How can you dispute the arguments of the world's top historians from a position of ignorance? The whole point of writing this page is to bring these views to an audience previously unaware of them - that's wiki for me.

Why claim it's bogus without reading the articles online I linked in the bibliography? And why would I waste time writing a bogus page, when you could google the books from the bibliography, and probably in many cases find articles confirming what I claim the authors are saying? I've got all but one of the books here if you have any questions.

There are B-class articles with much smaller scope, far fewer refernces and a much shorter bibliography. So please, as a newbie, how am I meant to prove the evracity of what I've written if you're not prepared to read the articles or check my refernces?

Is it accepted wiki practice for an editor to describe a page as bogus when they aren't aware of the historiography and aren't prepared to check the online sources refernced?

Regards. Ganpati23 (talk) 15:53, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Request posted on multiple talk pages. It looks like User:Hchc2009 has answered his question on the article talk page - Dank (push to talk) 17:37, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Conant article

While conducting the B-class assessment, I went over the James Bryant Conant article and cleaned up a few minor typos. I also came across something that you might wish to fix. In the President of Harvard section there was a sentence fragment, "Hanfstaengl wrote out a for 2,500 marks to Conant for a scholarship," I added the word "check" and ended the clause with a period. It seems like there may have been an explanatory clause after the comma because the next sentence does not seem to fit. I'm guessing that students rioted because of Hanfstaengl's Nazi connections, but I'm not in a position to add the missing material, if any. Djmaschek (talk) 22:25, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

No, you got it correct. RE-worded a bit. Hanfstaengl seems to be somewhat obscure today. The real hassle is trying to convey the pro-Nazi sympathies of the Harvard "brahmins". Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:00, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 07 May 2012

Infobox

Re: [8]. Tell me which one and I'll add it, let's check one more for the B-class drive. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me 02:55, 12 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK

Thank you for your review of Mary Ellen Bagnall Oakeley. Anne (talk) 22:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

I look forward to seeing it on the front. page. Hawkeye7 (talk) 01:00, 15 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 May 2012

Bugle interview

Hey Hawkeye. The Bugle is going to start a semi-regular series called the "Article writers' guide", and the fist subject is biographical articles. Would you mind adding your views to the questions here, and adding any questions you feel are necessary? Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:28, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Thanks Hawkeye! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:56, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lauren Jackson

Yngvadottir (talk) 17:33, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:George Vasey.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:George Vasey.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:08, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

Possibly unfree File:Francis Hassett AWM HOBJ2314.jpg

A file that you uploaded or altered, File:Francis Hassett AWM HOBJ2314.jpg, has been listed at Wikipedia:Possibly unfree files because its copyright status is unclear or disputed. If the file's copyright status cannot be verified, it may be deleted. You may find more information on the file description page. You are welcome to add comments to its entry at the discussion if you are interested in it not being deleted. Thank you. Magog the Ogre (talk) 06:57, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

You may want to join me in tilting at windmills at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Commons:Deletion_requests/Various_PD-Australia_after_1945 ;) Nick-D (talk) 08:43, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
FYI, I think I've addressed this one. (OK: I hope I've addressed this one!) But I did it here - not on the page you've identified. I hope the two of you accept the challenge. I encourage you to, and if you need/want any help/support, I'm happy to join the cause. Pdfpdf (talk) 12:58, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Hmmmm. How sad. Those unknown unknowns will get you every time! Ho hum. Pdfpdf (talk) 13:37, 18 May 2012 (UTC)
Is there any scope to raise this with the AWM? If they were to slap a Wikimedia-friendly CC tag on the images they consider PD (which I'd imagine would be fairly uncontroversial and straightforward) this paranoia would go away. It seems to have the potential for a win-win (they get better use made of their images, and we can use their images more easily). Nick-D (talk) 00:03, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
There was a WOG push to using CC, but it is not compatible with Wikipedia. They cannot really put a license on stuff in the public domain. but I can ask. Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:41, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
Yeah, it's painful that they chose that license as the default. The ABS is using a Wikimedia-friendly CC license though, as are a few others. I imagine that the AWM will be bemused to be asked to license something they say they're no longer able to enforce copyright on... Nick-D (talk) 06:34, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Commander-in-Chief of the Forces - Thanks.

Hi Hawkeye7 - Many thanks for assessing James Scott, 1st Duke of Monmouth and helping me lift all 63 holders of the posts of Commander-in-Chief of the Forces and Chief of the General Staff to 'B' class. Very much appreciated. Dormskirk (talk) 21:12, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Very many thanks for The WikiChevrons. Dormskirk (talk) 22:26, 19 May 2012 (UTC)
No worries. You earned them. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:55, 19 May 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Vannevar Bush

Hello, I just wanted to introduce myself and let you know I am glad to be reviewing the article Vannevar Bush you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Viriditas (talk) 12:48, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

ref=harv ?

Hello and many thanks for promoting my DYK hook for the Stephen Hopkins article. I noticed that you modified all of the references in the bibliography with the subject addition, but I don't know what it means. Can you enlighten me?Sarnold17 (talk) 12:52, 20 May 2012 (UTC)

  • It creates an anchor for your references. When you use a Sfn template you should use {{Sfn|Author|year|p=n}} In conjunction with the ref=harv, if you now click on one of your references, you will see that it highlights the reference itself. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:05, 20 May 2012 (UTC)
    • Many thanks; this is very helpful.Sarnold17 (talk) 23:08, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 May 2012

The Bugle: Issue LXXIV, May 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 14:46, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations again... again!

 The Military history A-Class medal with swords 
In recognition of your continued outstanding article work, you are hereby awarded the A-Class Medal with Swords for the articles Kenneth Nichols, Alsos Mission and Battle of Goodenough Island, promoted to A-Class between March and May 2012. On behalf of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, Ian Rose (talk) 15:26, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Hawkeye7/Archive_2015&oldid=494325105"