User talk:Dana boomer/Archive 9

Please help assess articles for Public Policy Initiative research

Hi Dana boomer/Archive 9,

Your work as an Online Ambassador is making a big contribution to Wikipedia. Right now, we're trying to measure just how much student work improves the quality of Wikipedia. If you'd like contribute to this research and get a firsthand look at the quality improvement that is happening through the project, please sign up to assess articles. Assessment is happening now, just use the quantitative metric and start assessing! Your help would be hugely appreciated!

Thank you, ARoth (Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 17:11, 6 May 2011 (UTC)

Military history project ACRs for closure

Hi, sorry to bother you. We are currently having trouble finding an uninvolved co-ordinator to close a few ACRs. If you get a free moment, could you please take a look at the list at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#ACRs for closure and close one if you are uninvolved? Cheers! AustralianRupert (talk) 04:09, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Looks like most of them have been taken care of. I should have a few free minutes tonight, so will check and see if there are any still up. Apologies for my absence lately - springtime is here and my "dark at 5 pm, might as well edit WP" hours are quickly disappearing into the summer evening :) Please feel free to ping me on anything that needs to be done and I will try to get to it, though. Dana boomer (talk) 11:49, 7 May 2011 (UTC)

Good luck with the Appaloosa

(All of my copyedits are wonderful, I'll be sorely missed when I'm gone. :lol: ) Malleus Fatuorum 00:30, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXII, April 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Members: Contest results, A-class medal recipients Editorial: Buggie111 discusses neutral point of view

To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:09, 17 May 2011 (UTC)

Request for comment

Could you comment on my proposal related to nudity in images in the idea lab? Ryan Vesey (talk) 01:34, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador sweatshirt

Hi! This is the last call for signing on for a Wikipedia Ambassador hooded sweatshirt (in case you missed the earlier message in one of the program newsletters about it). If you would like one, please email me with your name, mailing address, and (US) sweatshirt size. We have a limited number left, so it will be first-come, first-served. (If more than one size would work for you, note that as well.)

Cheers, Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:40, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Pics in Commons question

Dana, where do I find guidance on how the OTRS thingy works for images? I have a photo that a friend took of her kid (identity not visible) working with my horse that would be good to use for an article here. She said it was OK for me to use it for free on WP and assorted projects, but I can't upload it as my own image because I wasn't the photographer, so how does this all work if I upload it and then do the "send OTRS" request? I've never had to jump through this particular set of hoops before. thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 22:18, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

WP:OTRS has some pretty good information on it - in the see also section there are links to templates and other help. Your friend is going to need to actually send the OTRS, because it's her image. Hope this helps; if you have more specific questions please ask, but I'm not the most informed person on the subject either :) Dana boomer (talk) 01:41, 21 May 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! That will get me started! Montanabw^(talk) 04:21, 22 May 2011 (UTC)

Azerbaijan review

Hi Dana, I thanks for your feedback on the Azerbaijan review. I made changes ever since. Could you please take a look at it: [1]. Neftchi (talk) 16:35, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Please take the Wikipedia Ambassador Program survey

Hi Ambassador,

We are at a pivotal point in the development of the Wikipedia Ambassador Program. Your feedback will help shape the program and role of Ambassadors in the future. Please take this 10 minute survey to help inform and improve the Wikipedia Ambassadors.

WMF will de-identify results and make them available to you. According to KwikSurveys' privacy policy: "Data and email addresses will not be sold, rented, leased or disclosed to 3rd parties." This link takes you to the online survey: http://kwiksurveys.com?u=WPAmbassador_talk

Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments, Thank You!

Amy Roth (Research Analyst, Public Policy Initiative) (talk) 20:37, 24 May 2011 (UTC)

Draped Bust dollar

Hi Dana. Thanks for the comments at the FAC for Draped Bust dollar! I've responded and attempted to address all your concerns. Thanks again!-RHM22 (talk) 21:26, 30 May 2011 (UTC)

Where would you prefer that I post my "words of wisdom"?

I'm talking about the American Livestock Breeds Conservancy article that you asked me to take a look at of course. Don't be alarmed if I come up with a big list; I don't think I've ever looked at an article and thought, "yeah, that's just the bee's knees, absolutely perfect". Or the dog's bollocks as we Anglo-Saxon-Normans tend to say. Malleus Fatuorum 21:51, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Oops, I'd forgotten that you're an administrator. Is using the word "bollocks" a blocking offence? ;-) Malleus Fatuorum 21:56, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

"Dog's bollocks", eh? Don't think I've ever heard that phrase before - despite the fact that my best friend's dating a Brit (that she met in the Dutch Antilles, if you can believe that!). And no, definitely not a blocking offense :) It takes much more than a random bollocks (or sycophantic :) for my blocking finger to start itching.

And, the talk page of the article is probably the best place for your words of wisdom, although if you want to put them here you are welcome to as well. Big lists are OK - it makes me feel better about FAC to fix a bunch of things beforehand; otherwise, I feel like I'm missing something :) Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 22:35, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Here's a test: if he's really a Brit he'll know the meaning of "that's the dog's bollocks". Contrary to what you might think it's a very great compliment ... not sure what that says about us. Malleus Fatuorum 22:37, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

OK, I've done that. But to be perfectly frank I don't believe that the article even meets the GA criteria, and I wouldn't have passed it at GAN. Malleus Fatuorum 23:50, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough. Thanks for the c/e. I'll continue the discussion on the talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 00:02, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

This is an aspect of reviewing that I hate. You think one thing and I think another, and there's little room for manoeuvre in between. Malleus Fatuorum 00:07, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I feel that I owe you an apology for being so tetchy. It's in many ways a nice article, but I really don't think that it's comprehensive enough for FA without more info on the organisation itself rather that its endangered list, which is at the nub of my concerns. Hopefully someone else will chip in and offer a third opinion. Malleus Fatuorum 18:29, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I pointed Dana towards some possible secondary sources .. or at least a line on them, so you can stop feeling quite so guilty about being grumpy. Who is going to get the musty basement smell out of my nose though - after rental property scouting today ... eeewww.... Ealdgyth - Talk 18:35, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

I've got an apartment you can rent ... unfortunately it's about 4000 miles away though, on a different continent. Malleus Fatuorum 19:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Oh, no, we're the landlords, not the tenants. We were just out looking at some more possible houses ... and sometimes they can be kinda scary to look at! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:15, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

And isn't that "flat to let" rather than "apartment to rent" anyway??? Are we corrupting you to Americanisms? (gawks) Ealdgyth - Talk 20:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

PR "Footprints in the Sand (song)"

First of all, thank you for the copy-edits and the review you made to the article, I've replied some concerns in case you are not watching it (shortcut). ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 00:05, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

Me againg, I've replied you. ۞ Tbhotch^™ & (ↄ), Problems with my English? 17:37, 6 June 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIII, May 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project News: From the editors – Contest results, A-class medal recipients Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Editorial: Hawkeye's thoughts on the article writing process

To begin or stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 22:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Review of 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment

@Peer review:

@Peer review:

Thank you for reviewing 1st Filipino Infantry Regiment. The suggested improvements have helped the quality of the article. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 22:01, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Archaic Globalization

Hi Dana,

Thank you so much for your patience. I notified my group that tomorrow you may start making reviews to the article. I am very sorry for the delay.

Bfowler513 (talk) 17:08, 9 June 2011 (UTC)Bridget

I concur it is probably a good time to start the review. Thanks! --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk} 01:20, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Pixies FAR

Hi Dana, I've been extremely busy recently, but I will make time this weekend to return to the FAR. Thanks. WesleyDodds (talk) 05:12, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Triangle editor

There is an editor whose name is the shape of a triangle who has a submarine on the home page. This editor has replaced duplicate citations with autogenerated numbered on the Battle of Jerusalem (1917) article and now in the same article has replaced the Australian War Memorial catalogue number of a photograph with the title of the photograph. This person really worries me because they are editing out important information. I have gone through and corrected the citations but is there some way this person can be stopped?--Rskp (talk) 05:22, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Delta (that's what his user name stands for) changed the image link because the title of the photograph has been changed. There's still a link from the old name, so changing it back like you did will work, but technically it should probably be linked from the name it is now. As for the references, it is common practice to use the named ref feature, instead of repeating the information from the reference. I see that you have now fixed the references using more descriptive names, which is good, as the names he used are a bit odd - I'm assuming he was using some kind of script. Nothing he did was technically wrong, and I don't think he really needs to be "stopped". However, my first suggestion would be to talk to him. As far as I can see, you have not posted on his talk page about this article, and this should always be your first step - try to discuss with him why you didn't like his changes, or ask if there was a policy-based reason for what he did. Just a few thoughts, Dana boomer (talk) 10:20, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

I've posted to delta's talk page twice - asking why the edits were made as there may be a good reason I can't think of. Both have been deleted - hence my bleat. --Rskp (talk) 02:31, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Well, in that case, there's not really a lot you can do. As I said, both actions were technically correct, so "stopping" him isn't really an option. If he does it to more articles that you work on, then you might explore dispute resolution options, but other than that, it's kind of a dead horse. Sorry that I can't give you more than this, Dana boomer (talk) 11:16, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks anyway. At least I know his name now! :) I appreciate your time. --Rskp (talk) 07:51, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Sorraia's Page correction (from Portugal)

Dear Dana Boomer

I made a correction on Sorraia's page because it was mentioned that Portugal is a region of the Iberian Peninsula. But Portugal is a country and not just a region. I think it would be better to refer Portugal as a country and not as a region.

Thank you for your attention

Greetings from Portugal — Preceding unsigned comment added by 85.242.251.82 (talk) 18:52, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

It doesn't say that Portugal is a region. It says "indigenous to a region on the Iberian peninsula known today as Portugal." In other words, the region in which the Sorraia developed is now known as the country of Portugal, but what is now known as the Sorraia began to develop before Portugal existed as a country. So, we can't say that the Sorraia is indigenous to Portugal, because it's not, it's indigenous to the part of the Iberian Peninsula which is now Portugal. Dana boomer (talk) 19:48, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

FYI

I've cited a comment from you, at Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Piano non troppo. -- Cirt (talk) 03:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the notification. I have wondered about a possible connection between these two users. Just one comment: I am a FAR delegate, not a FAC delegate. A minor point, though. Dana boomer (talk) 11:23, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Banagher

Hi. You added a "See also:" to the Banagher article, directing to Banagher Horse Fair. This article is an orphaned stub and probably should be deleted. It doesn't add any further information about the fair that is not in the main article. Would you mind if I removed it?Corcs999 (talk) 21:25, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Yes, it's an orphan, and yes, it's a stub, but what is your reasoning for deletion? It seems like a notable event to me. I'm not sure why removing it from the article would be beneficial, although perhaps moving it to a less prominent position (perhaps linking within the text, rather than a see also?) would be a good compromise. Dana boomer (talk) 21:29, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

resource request

Hi Dana,

I've responded to your post at Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request. You can find links to two of the three articles you requested there. Best, GabrielF (talk) 22:23, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

You should have an incoming email right around now. I have those files ready. Franamax (talk) 02:09, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The last of your requests has been answered. Please remember to indicate {{resolved}} when you've gotten it.LeadSongDog come howl! 19:15, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

RE: Closing merges

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

You are cordially invited to participate in WikiProject Christianity The goal of WikiProject Christianity is to improve the quality and quantity of information about Christianity available on Wikipedia. WP:X as a group does not prefer any particular tradition or denominination of Christianity, but prefers that all Christian traditions are fairly and accurately represented.

I would like to note that WikiProject Christianity is currently disfunctional in my opinion. I have started discussion about re-elections of coordinators and will later take on the task of re-organizing the entire project. I would appreciate it if you join the project and participate in the discussion Here. Ryan Vesey (talk) 22:37, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Restart

Dana, can you restart Wikipedia:Featured article review/Tuberculosis/archive1‎ or something? I just feel terrible messing up the review and I would like to start this all over again. GamerPro64 15:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Milhist task force expansion

Hi Dana :) Per this discussion the South American task force, of which you are a coordinator, has now been expanded to cover Central America as well. The new task force can be found at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Central and South American military history task force. I've left a redirect at the old title but you may wish to update your watchlist accordingly. Best, EyeSerene^talk 16:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

This message is really, really late (I was offline for a while :/) but I just wanted to say thanks for reviewing Tripoli. Your comments will help to get it up to GA status. Thanks again! Theking17825 19:37, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Apr–Jun 2011

<moved to barnstars page>

The Bugle: Issue LXIV, June 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Finland and Spitfires Op-ed: Fifelfoo and hunting for plagiarism

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. BrownBot (talk) 22:43, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

India FAR

Hi there, The history section expansion of India in response to FAR comments is now complete. All remaining issues have been addressed. Please weigh in at FARC. Regards, Fowler&fowler«Talk» 20:21, 17 July 2011 (UTC)

File names being changed

Hi, I bleated some time ago about [delta] changing readable citations to autogenerated ones. Now this same editor is changing file names and the original files are being deleted by Fastily. DragonflySixtyseven DS wrote on my talk page on 10 July about one of the files which has subsequently been deleted, but didn't reply there or on his talk page where I left a similar message. The process is degrading the information in these articles because the original names of the institutions and catalogue numbers of the photos are being deleted. Is there anyway of getting some protection from these people and protecting the original file names? --Rskp (talk) 07:35, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

I've just noticed that when [delta] changed the file name in the Battle of Jerusalem article, even though this article is on my watchlist, the change was not noted on my watchlist. How can that be? --Rskp (talk) 08:03, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

As to your second question, when he moved the file to a new name, he most likely left a redirect from the original file name. This way, the link in the article would have remained the same (going to the redirect) and since there was no actual change to the article it wouldn't have shown on your watchlist. As to the first - I really don't know. I would suggest posting a polite message for Fastily (accusations and incivility will get you nowhere) asking what can be done on this. If your main concern is that institution names and catalog numbers are being deleted, this information can be added into the image description (the information given on the image page under the image itself) and so not be separated from the image. I'm surprised it's not already in the description, since this would be essential source information. My guess is that they are trying to make the image titles more descriptive and intuitive, since something like "LOC_24497" (and I'm just guessing here) tells you nothing about the image itself. Dana boomer (talk) 12:17, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. I will definitely make sure that next time I upload photos etc I will include a description in the file name. I've posted a polite note for Fastily who hasn't replied yet. DragonflySixtyseven finally replied after several notes but only told me why catalogue numbers weren't helpful. I just didn't think this could be a problem - but I'm surprised [delta] is an administrator and able to change these file names. --Rskp (talk) 02:22, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

PS I was wrong, Fastily has replied telling me [delta] is not an administrator but he is yet to explain how [delta] could change these file names. --Rskp (talk) 02:44, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Because AFAIK anyone can change a file name, unless they are doing a move over a redirect. This is the same as in the main article space. Administrators are only needed if you're trying to move a page/file to a name that has already been created/has a history. Dana boomer (talk) 11:28, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

We mere mortal editors can ask for and get file mover permission (I have it, have yet to use it) we can't move articles over history, but we can move and rename photos. Montanabw^(talk) 20:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Thanks a lot. No I didn't have that permission but DragonflySixtyseven gave it a couple of hours ago - This all started out because file names were being changed in articles I was working on. I just wanted to know why and how it was done! :) --Rskp (talk) 02:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Interestingly some photo files when enlarged show only the options of 'file' and 'create' while others have a range of options including 'edit' and 'move'. But 'how' and 'why' will be avoided while its anything remotely to do with [delta] or [ΔT The only constant] on wikipedia. Life is too short as it is! --Rskp (talk) 04:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Merge stuff

Tossed the merge tag on the Alter Real/Lusitano and redirected the Alter Real per Manfred's commentary. He appears to be the expert on this and verified that Alter Real is a bloodline not a separate breed. I may have been a little bold, but figured it was time to act. As there were no sources on the Alter Real piece and a possible copyvio concern there, I just blanked the article. Manfred suggested we do expand stuff on bloodlines, and I asked him to point us to some sources. It would be fun to expand on the bloodlines if verifiable material can be located, but no rush. Montanabw^(talk) 19:34, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Yup. This has been on my to-do list since Manfred's note, but have been insanely busy in RL. Thanks for taking it on. I'll leave a comment on the talk page in a minute. Dana boomer (talk) 22:38, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Speaking of RL, our home-started broccoli is doing nicely and starting to form heads! The tomatoes and peppers are also quite happy, though the habeneros still haven't flowered. Montanabw^(talk) 23:12, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Yay broccoli (and cauliflower)! Ours is just starting to come in in quantity. Tomatoes are doing well - picked the first ripe cherry tomato about a week ago, the rest should be coming soon. Habaneros are still kind of small - they were at the bottom of the priority list (as a fun experiment, rather than a cash crop) so got transplanted later than they should have. Squash is in its second week - quickly transferring from "oh it's so cute" to "oh make it stop". Cherries (the tree, not the tomato) started last week, and blueberries this week - need to be careful or I'll make myself sick :) Dana boomer (talk) 18:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

What fun! You are about 2-3 weeks ahead of us. Our raspberries are on the cusp of ripening and the madness there shall soon begin (We have a massive patch)! If you get your habeneros to actually produce fruit, do tell, ours are looking lovely, but they do every year, like potted plants, but we've previously always had trouble getting actual peppers to set. Our two cherry trees have massive amounts of green cherries set, more than ever before, but they are staying little oval baby-shaped and not rounding out, a few are even turning red without plumping out properly, which is really weird. Any notion what's going on? (was a cold wet spring, but was 100 degrees yesterday, not sure WTF is happening) Montanabw^(talk) 20:40, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

There's always a few that turn red without plumping out - at least on our trees - not sure what causes it, but I don't think we've seen any more than usual this year. It could be that they don't like the heat, but I can't see how that would be, because it's been just as hot here and ours are fine. Usually heat just brings them along faster. Our sours are smaller than normal this year though (despite it only being an average harvest) - although we're mainly just happy we have any crop at all: last year we got a late spring frost combined with major windstorms in early July that made it so we didn't even take the harvesting equipment out of the barn. Raspberries are starting to come on strong for us - picked ~50 pints Wednesday and Thursday and there's probably about that many more already ripe again. The fun that is summer - getting up early, working late and never having enough hours of daylight to get everything done :) Dana boomer (talk) 09:49, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

With us, it might be that Spring was really wet and a bunch set, now it's drying up and they may not have enough resources. I'm going to just try massive watering at the roots of the trees. We have a bumper crop of raspberries this year, too! I know the feeling of watching stuff ripening -- and the ensuing panic to get it all in! Montanabw^(talk) 17:23, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Ambassador Program: assessment drive

Even though it's been quiet on-wiki, the Wikipedia Ambassador Program has been busy over the last few months getting ready for the next term. We're heading toward over 80 classes in the US, across all disciplines. You'll see courses start popping up here, and this time we want to match one or more Online Ambassadors to each class based on interest or expertise in the subject matter. If you see a class that you're interested, please contact the professor and/or me; the sooner the Ambassadors and professors get in communication, the better things go. Look for more in the coming weeks about next term.

In the meantime, with a little help I've identified all the articles students did significant work on in the last term. Many of the articles have never been assessed, or have ratings that are out of date from before the students improved them. Please help assess them! Pick a class, or just a few articles, and give them a rating (and add a relevant WikiProject banner if there isn't one), and then update the list of articles.

Once we have updated assessments for all these articles, we can get a better idea of how quality varied from course to course, and which approaches to running Wikipedia assignments and managing courses are most effective.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:23, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Congrats (we think)

I see HIWWI is going to be TFA on Saturday! Good luck with the usual onslaught. I'm probably going to be offline much of the day, but if I get online, I'll swing by to peek in on things and lend support! Montanabw^(talk) 18:39, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Gah, yeah, I saw. Perfect time - middle of the summer, on a Saturday. Awesome. Don't I sound happy about this? No, really, I am.</sarcasm> :) Won't be online much that day either, so will have to come in and do a full-sweep cleaning the evening after it leaves the main page, and just hope that everyone else can catch the routine vandalism during the day. Dana boomer (talk) 21:49, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

I've watchlisted... let's hope everyone is out enjoying the summer weather? Ealdgyth - Talk 21:50, 27 July 2011 (UTC)

Working, although I will be outside for most of it. Weekends are just super busy, and much more outside-based than work during the week, so no internet access. Thanks for watchlisting. Dana boomer (talk) 02:13, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Tip off Richard, Pesky, and Cgoodwin, they will help, I bet. I think the Brits will be the first to see it, and Cg has the advantage of it being Sunday in Au. I wouldn't post this at WPEQ due to its current drama board status, but those folks are reliable sorts. Montanabw^(talk) 22:44, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance

Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on July 30, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 30, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.^™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 00:20, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

The use of horses in World War I reflected a transitional period in the evolution of armed conflict. Cavalry units were initially considered essential, but the vulnerability of the horse to modern machine gun and artillery fire eventually fostered interest in mechanized forces. All of the major combatants in World War I began the conflict with cavalry forces. Germany and Austria–Hungary stopped using them on the Western Front soon after the war began, but they continued to be deployed in a limited fashion on the Eastern Front well into the war. On the Allied side, the United Kingdom used mounted infantry and cavalry charges throughout the war, but the United States used cavalry for only a short time. Horses were mainly used for reconnaissance and for carrying messengers, as well as to pull artillery, ambulances, and supply wagons. The presence of horses often increased morale among the soldiers at the front, but contributed to disease and poor sanitation in camps. The value of horses was such that by 1917 it was made known to some troops that the loss of a horse was of greater tactical concern than the loss of a human soldier. Ultimately, the Allied blockade prevented the Central Powers from importing horses to replace those lost, which contributed to Germany's defeat. (more...)

Parliament Acts 1911 and 1949 (FAR)

It remains my firm belief that the immediate review (and ultimately, in my opinion, the removal) of this article's FA status is in the strong interests of the encyclopedia; and, as such, this improvement should outweigh the need for procedures under the IAR policy. The discussion period, I would think, is designed to stop petty things dragging an article to FAR and to keep small improvements to talk pages. It also helps stop frivolous nominations I would have thought by extending the time periods involved. The case of the above article must be seen in an entirely different context: where the article is well below the standards expected. I'm sure Dana that you recognise that the article is in this state; I would expect most GA reviewers to fail the article as it stands. There is no indication that following procedure will result in any outcome other than the review the article is currently undergoing. As such, maintaining an articles an FA when it is not is almost certainly harmful and imbue a lack of confidence in the FA standards. For this reason I think the wekk period should be skipped; however, I have made such a notice anyway, should you disagree (no point wasting further time discussing the discussion). Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 15:03, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

While I understand your opinion (and agree that the article is in poor shape), there are quite a few FAs from 2005-2007 that would have a hard time meeting today's GA standards, much less the FA criteria. While the required notification is useful in preventing frivolous nominations and FARs for petty issues, its main purpose is to jump start discussion about the improvement of the article. In this case, a couple of days at FAR has already shown that there are two editors with an interest in the article - why not take the discussion with them to the talk page (I see you've already posted there, thank you for that) and see if you can work something out? The focus of FAR is supposed to be a place where articles can be brought to find editors to bring them back into compliance with the FA criteria, not a one-stop delisting center. While this doesn't always work, and some articles are delisted, other articles are successfully brought back to FA status. The article has been in its current state for a while, and will be at FAR for at least a month (likely more if someone decides to take the article on board and begin working on it) - a week of pre-discussion will not hurt anything, and may even result in improvements to the article. Lastly, I am curious - why do you want the article delisted if you're just planning on improving it yourself? Why not just work on it and then bring it to FAR if you find issues that you can't fix? Dana boomer (talk) 15:31, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

Well, if there's something that both my unsuccessful FACs have taught me, is that's it's a high bar. It's justified by suggesting it's consistent bar (i.e. a fair one) and I don't think that's true here. Improving it and keeping the rating seems false. If there's lots of articles in a similar predicament, perhaps it would be advisable for the project to look at it (I believe there's a WikiProject for that) en masse. Anyway, we'll stick to process for now. Improving it up to a standard within a week would be Sisyphean task. Grandiose (me, talk, contribs) 21:21, 28 July 2011 (UTC)

I'm definitely not arguing that the article is in need of either serious work or delisting - it obviously doesn't meet FA criteria at the moment. I'm not sure why "improving the article and keeping the rating" seems false, however. If the article meets the criteria, it meets the criteria - if another editor doesn't agree, they can restart the process. However, the week (or longer) talk page notification is not saying "do the work in a week, or else we're taking it to FAR". The purpose of the notification is basically to say "hey, are there any interested editors who are willing to work on this article outside of the confines of a formal FAR?" A lot of times on older FAs, all you'll hear is crickets chirping. However, sometimes you'll get an editor that comes along and says "I didn't realize it was below FA criteria. I'm interested in working on the article, but need to wait until after my job/holiday/school/whatever ends. Can you hold off on the FAR for a while, please." They'll then do the work (even if it takes longer than a week), and the article will be back up to FA status without the need for a formal FAR process. We are slowly working through the older FAs, but there are many more editors interested in taking a B-class article to FAC than there are interested in re-writing an old FA that might only be at C or B class currently. En-masse is not really advisable, because it tends to overwhelm the few editors interested in this area. Dana boomer (talk) 00:36, 29 July 2011 (UTC)

FAR

Wikipedia:Featured article review/History of merit badges (Boy Scouts of America)/archive1 question for you there. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.246.49.18 (talk) 00:08, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

Duke University FAR

Hi! If you could please go back to the Duke University FAR that you nominated and let me know if all your concerns have been addressed, I'd greatly appreciate it. I have spent many many hours (more than I'd like to admit!) trying to improve this article with a particular focus on improving the referencing. I have updated, modified, and added numerous references in addition to an extensive copyedit of the text and some structural changes. Hopefully, the effort has been worthwhile. I believe the article is greatly improved. Let me know if you have any questions or concerns. Thanks! -Bluedog423^Talk 03:26, 2 August 2011 (UTC)

Horses in World War I

Congratulations on this excellent article. The subject is a vast one and your research brought a mass of complexities (military, technical, equine and social) together into a coherent whole. Working on a much smaller scale I wrote most of the WWI section in the "Cavalry" article and had to settle for more generalisations and less detail than I would have preferred - otherwise it would have become out of proportion with the article as a whole. Buistr (talk) 02:45, 13 August 2011 (UTC))

FA-images - to ALT or not to ALT?

Hello Dana, i am a bit confused with http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Featured_article_review/USS_Kentucky_(BB-66)/archive1 (and a few others), where requests for ALT-text are inserted into FA-discussion. As far as i understood the current ruling, ALT-text is "nice to have", but not strictly required. I am not 100% fluent in all rule details and their history, would you mind clarifying the current situation for FAs or point to the latest discussion please? Many thanks for your help and working so hard on the FA-project. Regards. GermanJoe (talk) 07:37, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Alt text was explicitly required by the FA criteria for about a year, but was then removed. The current consensus, as you correctly understood, is that it's nice to have but is not absolutely necessary. Some of the relevant discussions are here if you've got a lot of time on your hands. Nikkimaria (talk) 13:57, 13 August 2011 (UTC)

Not that much time - but good to know, i am not imagining things. Thanks for the clarification. GermanJoe (talk) 06:17, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

jamshedpur

Sorry for the late reply. You had reviewed the article Jamshedpur once. I have left a major proposal for change in the article's talk page, please advice if possible to get the article to GA standard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Jamshedpur#Major_changes_to_the_article — Preceding unsigned comment added by Devx101 (talk • contribs) 20:16, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

At this point, my comments in the review still stand - because of the lack of obvious inclusion criteria and reliable sources, the sections on popular culture, notable people, and places of interest are nothing more than trivia. Dana boomer (talk) 13:29, 15 August 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXV, July 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Zeebrugee and Afghanistan Op-ed: WereSpielChequers examines RfA

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. BrownBot (talk) 21:47, 14 August 2011 (UTC)

De-orphan

Autism (journal) Subin.a.mathew (talk) 09:30, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Pardon? Yes, the article is an orphan. To de-orphan it, it needs to have three incoming links (where the term is linked in other articles) from the mainspace (not talk pages, user pages, etc). Dana boomer (talk) 10:30, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

Online Ambassadors: Time to join pods

Hello! If you're planning to be an active Online Ambassador for the upcoming academic term, now is the time to join one or more pods. (A pod consists of the instructor, the Campus Ambassadors, and the Online Ambassadors for single class.) The Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) explains the expectations for being part of a pod as an Online Ambassador. (The MOU for pods in Canada is essentially the same.) In short, the role of Online Ambassadors this term consists of:

• Working closely with the instructor and Campus Ambassadors, providing advice and perspective as an experienced Wikipedian
• Helping students who ask for it (or helping them to find the help they need)
• Watching out for the class as a whole
• Helping students to get community feedback on their work

This replaces the 1-on-1 mentoring role for Online Ambassadors that we had in previous terms; rather than being responsible for individual students (some of whom don't want or help or are unresponsive), Online Ambassadors will be there to help whichever students in their class(es) ask for help.

You can browse the upcoming courses here: United States; Canada. More are being added as new pods become active and create their course pages.

Once you've found a class that you want to work with—especially if you some interest or expertise in the topic area—you should sign the MOU listing for that class and get in touch with the instructor. We're hoping to have at least two Online Ambassadors per pod, and more for the larger classes.

If you're up for supporting any kind of class and would like me to assign you to a pod in need of more Online Ambassadors, just let me know.

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:31, 19 August 2011 (UTC)

PS: There are still a lot of student articles from the last term that haven't been rated. Please rate a few and update the list!

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)

Pod suggestions

Hi Dana! I'm in the process of trying to find Online Ambassadors to support each of the classes for this coming term, and I want to recommend a few to you: Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Architectural Design V(Jim Sullivan, Meredith Sattler) and Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Accelerated Composition (Patricia Fancher). If you're up for it, please check out the Memorandum of Understanding (linked above) which sketches the expectations for Online Ambassadors this term, and then you can sign on to a class and get in touch with the professor.

If there's another class you'd rather support (or if you're up for joining more than one pod), feel free! We're shooting for at least about 2 Online Ambassadors for each class.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:17, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:Military History and WP:Espionage Merge?

On the WikiProject Military History disucussion page there is talk about a merge and eliminating WP:Espionage altogether. Would like your feedback there. It would be appreciated. Adamdaley (talk) 08:24, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

Requested reassessment of Percheron

An article that you have been involved in editing, Percheron, has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the good article reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status will be removed from the article. Justlettersandnumbers (talk) 11:20, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

Undelete request

Could you restore File:Nayirah.jpg for Nayirah (testimony). It would probably fall under fair-use.Smallman12q (talk) 00:50, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

Smallman, my apologies for my slow response. I just tried to undelete the file, and all I could undelete was the page itself (the image licensing, section headers, etc), not the image. I think it has to be reuploaded? Or maybe it was originally on Commons (where I can't undelete stuff)? If there are any more image-savvy admins reading this, I'd be interested to know what the issue is. I'm sorry for not being able to help, Smallman, and hope that you're able to find a way to get the image back. Dana boomer (talk) 11:06, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

That's ok...you tried. It was uploaded on enwiki (according to the log). I'll just get the picture again and upload it again...wanted to preserve the original '05 one though. Thanks again for trying!Smallman12q (talk) 02:24, 5 September 2011 (UTC)

Point Park Civic Center

Yikes. I was a little shocked to see this get moved ahead of the other articles that had been in FAR for much longer... I was sort of using that as a guideline for where in the FAR timeline it was. =( Christopher Parham (talk) 05:52, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The other articles in the FAR section have been actively worked on, and have interested editors commenting relatively regularly, as well as giving schedules for when they are thinking of working on the article. The other articles in the FARC section have also had interested editors working on them, and are mostly in need of additional reviewers/comments. In the Park Point article, you commented once (well, two posts a few minutes apart), and then we heard nothing more from you (including no work on the article) for the next five weeks, during the rest of the FAR and the entire FARC process, despite other editors identifying areas of concern. I apologize for removing this from FARC if you were planning to work on it; however, if this happens in the future, a note on the page that you were still interested would be appreciated. Obviously, when the issues have been addressed (and you might want to ping the commenting reviewers to make sure they have been addressed), the article can go back to FAC if you wish - there is no hold period. I hope this answers your question. Dana boomer (talk) 11:16, 9 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at Carthage and Australia in Palestine Op-ed: Remembering 9/11

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) 17:45, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

Milhist coordinator elections

Hi Dana. Just a reminder that the nomination period for this year's coordinator elections expires at midnight tomorrow (UTC). When you get the chance, would you mind indicating your intentions in the table here? If you're intending to stand for re-election you'll also need to complete your nomination statement fairly soon :) Best, EyeSerene^talk 12:37, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi EyeSerene, and thanks for the note. I've updated the table to state that I will not be running this year. I have had much less time for WP this past year than I anticipated, and I feel that I have done a dis-service to my fellow coordinators through my lack of participation in MILHIST discussions. Because it appears that my lack of time will continue, I will not be standing this year, although if that changes in the future you might see my name on the lists in subsequent years! Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 12:58, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Okay, thanks for that. Thank you too on behalf of us all for your work during your term in office - despite your feelings I can assure you that every contribution you made was valuable and you've done no-one a dis-sservice! Every little counts :) I understand your position though, so thanks again and I look forward to perhaps working with you in the future. Best, EyeSerene^talk 13:31, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Dang that real life thing! We'd all be WP 24/7 if it weren't for things like eating, drinking, sleeping, working, going to the loo, etc... Montanabw^(talk) 20:14, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Good Article promotion

	Congratulations!
	Thanks for all the work you did in making Clydesdale horse a certified "Good Article"! Your work is much appreciated. In the spirit of celebration, you may wish to review one of the Good Article nominees that someone else nominated, as there is currently a backlog, and any help is appreciated. All the best, – Quadell (talk) 19:02, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Research into the user pages of Wikipedians: Invitation to participate

Greetings,

My name is John-Paul and I am a student with the University of Alberta specializing in Communications and Technology.

I would like to include your Wikipedia user page in a study I am doing about how people present themselves online. I am interested in whether people see themselves in different ways, online and offline. One of the things I am looking at is how contributors to Wikipedia present themselves to each other through their user pages. Would you consider letting me include your user page in my study?

With your consent, I will read and analyze your user page, and ask you five short questions about it that will take about ten to fifteen minutes to answer. I am looking at about twenty user pages belonging to twenty different people. I will be looking at all user pages together, looking for common threads in the way people introduce themselves to other Wikipedians.

I hope that my research will help answer questions about how people collaborate, work together, and share knowledge. If you are open to participating in this study, please reply to this message, on your User Talk page or on mine. I will provide you with a complete description of my research, which you can use to decide if you want to participate.

Thank-you,

John-Paul Mcvea
University of Alberta
jmcvea@ualberta.ca

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 21:51, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Sure, although I reserve the right to refuse to answer any or all of the questions once I see them, especially if any of them ask for more private information than is already available on my user page. Dana boomer (talk) 23:38, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

I have no problem with that. Please see below for the questions and for other information about my study -- and thank-you : ) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Johnpaulmcvea (talk • contribs) 23:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Minor mission

I was reviewing another user's automated edits and in the process discovered that Westphalian horse has sourcing issues, material cited doesn't match the source as it appears today. This was one of Countercanter's earliest article edits when she was not as strong an editor as she became later, and though she later was a reliable editor, here she wasn't so top notch. I don't have the time to go redo this one, but maybe if you are interested, you may want to. Your call. Montanabw^(talk) 03:28, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

I'll put it on my to-do list. Dana boomer (talk) 12:36, 22 September 2011 (UTC)

Thank-you for agreeing to participate in my study

Thank-you for agreeing to participate in my study, entitled “Online Self-presentation among Wikipedians.” I appreciate it.

As I indicated before, here are five questions that I would like you to answer. Please be as brief or as thorough as you like.

5 QUESTIONS

1. Are you a member of social networks such Facebook or MySpace?

2. In addition to maintaining a user page in Wikipedia, have you also written or edited articles? If so, about how many times?

3. What are the key messages about yourself that you hope to convey with your user page?

4. Have your Wikipedia contributions ever received feedback, such as being edited by others or commented on? Have you received a message from another Wikipedia user? If so, do you think your user page positively or negatively affected what other people said and how they said it?

5. Do you see your “online self” as being different from your “offline self?” Can you elaborate?

Please indicate your answers to these questions on your talk page, or on mine. If you like, you can email your answers to me instead (jmcvea@ualberta.ca).

Thank you again : )

Johnpaulmcvea (talk) 23:43, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

Extended content

INDICATING CONSENT By answering these questions, you indicate your agreement with the following statements: • That you understand that you have been asked to be in a research study. • That you have read and received a copy of the Information Sheet, attached below (“Additional Information”). • That you understand the benefits and risks involved in taking part in this research study. • That you have had an opportunity to ask questions and discuss this study. • That you understand that you are free to refuse to participate, or to withdraw from the study at any time, without consequence, and that your information will be withdrawn at your request. • That the issue of confidentiality been explained to you and that you understand who will have access to your information (see “Additional Information”). • That you agree to participate. ADDITONAL INFORMATION Background • I am asking you to participate in a research project that is part of my MA degree. • I am asking you because you have created a user page in Wikipedia that other people can use to learn about you. Purpose • My research is about how people present themselves online. • I will look at how people present themselves when presenting themselves to the Wikipedia community. Study Procedures • With your consent, I will analyze the language of your user page and gather basic statistics such as the count of words, the frequency of words, the number of sections, and so on. • I will also read the text of your user page, looking for elements in common with ads posted by other people. I will note whether you include a picture, or links to other content on the internet, • I ask you to answer my five questions, above. This will take about ten to fifteen minutes to complete. I will ask you to answer the questions within a week, and send your answers to me. • Throughout my research, I will adhere to the University of Alberta Standards for the Protection of Human Research Participants, which you can view at http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/gfcpolicymanual/policymanualsection66.cfm Benefits • There is no direct benefit to you for participating in this research. You may, however, find it interesting to read my perspective on how you present yourself online. • I hope that the information I get from doing this study will help understand how technology affects the way people come together into a society. • There is no reward or compensation for participating in this research. Risk • There is no direct risk for participating in this research. Voluntary Participation • You are under no obligation to participate in this study. Participation is completely voluntary. • You can opt out of this study at any time before October 10, 2011, with no penalty. You can ask to have me withdraw any data that I have collected about you. Even if you agree to be in the study, you can change your mind and withdraw. • If you decline to continue or you wish to withdraw from the study, your information will be removed from the study at your request. Confidentiality • This research will be used to support a project that is part of my MA degree. • A summary of my research will be available on the University of Alberta website. • Your personally identifiable information will be deleted and digitally shredded as soon as I have finished gathering data about you. • Data will be kept confidential. Only I will have access to the computer file containing the data. It will be password protected. I will not be sent by email or stored online. • I will always handle my data in compliance with University of Alberta standards. • If you would like to receive a copy of my final report, please ask. Further Information • If you have any further questions regarding this study, please do not hesitate to contact Dr. Stanley Varnhagen, my research advisor for this project. If you have concerns about this study, you may contact the University of Alberta Research Ethics Committee at 780-492-2615. This office has no affiliation with the study investigators. Thank-you again!

Reply to questions

1. Are you a member of social networks such Facebook or MySpace?

1. Yes, Facebook. I'm friends with a few people from WP there, but for the most part, I interact with different people on WP and Facebook.

1. In addition to maintaining a user page in Wikipedia, have you also written or edited articles? If so, about how many times?

1. Yes. I have almost 15,000 article edits, out of almost 30,000 live edits. You can see more details of my editing history at this link. In the time that I've been editing here (since December 2007), I've only created a few articles, and I mainly spend my time editing existing articles, including taking several to WP:Good article, WP:Featured article and WP:Featured list status.

1. What are the key messages about yourself that you hope to convey with your user page?

1. I don't really "hope to convey" anything about myself from my user page. I mainly use it as a place where others can find out basic information about me (interests, articles I've worked on, etc), and a place to store information or links that I use frequently/may need in the future.

1. Have your Wikipedia contributions ever received feedback, such as being edited by others or commented on? Have you received a message from another Wikipedia user? If so, do you think your user page positively or negatively affected what other people said and how they said it?

1. I think that the majority of my article contributions have been later edited or commented upon - that's the main point of a collaborative wiki. I've also received many messages from other editors - my talk page has eight archives (and needs to be archived again), and I have also had extensive discussions with other editors on their talk pages and the talk pages of articles and projects. I doubt my user page really affects the majority of the messages that people leave for me, although I have had a couple of short notes on the contents of it, but mainly minor stuff.

1. Do you see your “online self” as being different from your “offline self?” Can you elaborate?

1. Not particularly. I don't share as much private information on Wikipedia as I do on Facebook or in person, but I'm essentially the same person. Although I don't generally write about areas that I am involved in in my professional life, I do tend to write about areas that I enjoy as a hobby or sport. I doubt anyone in my real life would be surprised at what I write about on-wiki...

General comment: I'm not sure how extensively you've researched or worked on wikis in general or Wikipedia specifically, but I think that for the large majority of users (i.e., everyone who's been editing here for more than a few days) the answers to question number two and question number four, parts one and two are going to be essentially the same. Contributing to articles is the main purpose of editing on Wikipedia, and editors who show interest only in using the site as a social networking tool ("Myspacing") are generally not treated with a lot of respect, and are generally either mentored and converted into productive editors or are shown the door. Also, discussing things with other editors (through leaving notes on their talk pages, receiving notes on your own talk page and discussions on article and Wikipedia space pages) is a huge portion of Wikipedia. Without this discussion, the entire framework of the encyclopedia would break down, as there would be no place for editors to work out differences and collaborate on mutually interesting topics.

I hope I've been helpful in the pursuit of research for your study. If you have any further questions, please let me know! I would love to get a copy of your final report. Dana boomer (talk) 12:56, 21 September 2011 (UTC)

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:

• Sociology of Poverty
• Architectural Design
• Introduction to Educational Psychology
• Intro to Mass Communication
• Psychology Seminar
• Theories of the State
• Advanced Media Studies

Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:

• Housing and Social Policy
• Anthropology, Wikipedia, and the Media
• History & Systems
• Horror Cinema
• Digital Media... just bits in a box
• Composition I
• Telecommunications Management
• Training Systems
• Stigma: Culture, Deviance, Identity
• Art and Terrorism
• Political Violence and Insurgency

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:11, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

FYI

May want to eyeball User talk:Klvankampen. Montanabw^(talk) 20:51, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the head's up. Dana boomer (talk) 23:54, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Topic Idea for Geography of crop plants class

Hey Dana, My name is Paul Layne and I am in Mary handleys geography of crop plants class at JMU. I want to give you my topic idea. Here is the corse page. Wikipedia:United States Education Program/Courses/Geography of Crop Plants (Mary Handley) Presently I am applying to go to Bangladesh for a year to work on water purification. As you may know Bangladesh has an enormous problem with Arsenic in groundwater. On Wikipedia I have found a fantastic paper on Phytoremediation and a fantastic paper on heavy metals in ground water. However, there are no papers explaining how plants use phytoremediation to absorb arsenic, and how this process could be used to purify groundwater of arsenic. I would like to explain this process and it’s possible applications for arsenic purification specifically. I have found several professional papers on this subject. Paul Layne (talk) 18:27, 30 September 2011 (UTC)Paul Layne

Hi Paul! Are you proposing a new article, or work on an existing article? While I think that an article on the purification of arsenic-laden water through phytoremediation or even on the purification of arsenic in general through phytoremediation would probably be over-specific (others may disagree, this is just my opinion), the article on Phytoremediation in general could stand a lot of work. Another idea would be to break out the section on phytoextraction (which seems to be the main way that arsenic is removed by plants) into its own article and expand on all aspects of the subject. I think that the basic process of water or soil purification through phytoextraction is essentially the same, no matter what the contaminant being removed, which is why I think an article specifically about the purification of arsenic would be over-specific. An article that goes in depth about the process of either phytoremediation as a whole or phytoextraction specifically and then details any variations based on what the contaminant is. However, this is all just my opinion. Another article that you might be interested in working on is Arsenic contamination of groundwater, specifically the section on water purification solutions. Let me know what your thoughts are, Dana boomer (talk) 23:37, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Dana, sory I took so long to get back to you. I think I will do a new page on The process of Phytoextraction. This page would be pretty technical and I would use a lot of sources that the public would not be able to access. I would discuss the organic chemistry that a plant does to pull out heavy metals. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Layne (talk • contribs) 13:49, 17 October 2011 (UTC)

Dana, I am very frustrated, I uploaded a picture to use on my page and now I can't find it and I can't re-upload it because wiki wont let me. It's name is Description of fenton reactions. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Layne (talk • contribs) 20:27, 23 October 2011 (UTC)

Thx dana I got that done, now I wana know how to get the picture to the correct place, right now it is awkwardly in the middle of the page. Also, I don't think the first picture I uploaded is ok to upload, but i'm not sure. I've decided just not to use it. Should I get it off wikipedia somehow? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Paul Layne (talk • contribs) 17:34, 24 October 2011 (UTC)

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

		The Military history reviewers' award
		By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Featrued article candidacies and A-Class reviews for the period Jul-Sept 2011, I am delighted to award you the Military history WikiProject Reviewers' award. Cheers, Buggie111 (talk) 14:08, 1 October 2011 (UTC)

Re: King Charles Spaniel FAC

Hi there, sorry about that, I'd made the modifications to the article a couple of days ago (although I did notice I'd missed one) and thought I'd responded on the FAC subpage - that edit must not have gone though. Miyagawa (talk) 13:17, 2 October 2011 (UTC)

Just thought I'd let you know... the King Charles Spaniel nomination has been up for almost a month, and nominations usually close after a month. The nom currently has 2 support votes, but many nominations have been closed as unsuccessful unless they have 3 or more support votes. I see that you were very close to supporting earlier. This is just a heads-up that if you don't support soon, the nomination may be closed as unsuccessful. All the best, – Quadell ^(talk) 12:36, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Topic idea for Geography of crop plants

Hello, my name is Alexander and Dr. Handley instructed me to post an outline of my intended topic of rice cultivation in the state of Arkansas on my user page and to then inform you that I have done so in order for you to critique it. Thank you very much! mccullaj (talk) 16:42, 03 October 2011 (UTC)

Hi McCullaj! Based on this image, it appears that much (most?) of the US's rice production comes from Arkansas. Due to this, I would say that an article on Rice cultivation in Arkansas has good scope, although if you wanted to expand it to Rice cultivation in the United States it would probably be even better. You can possibly find a good start to sources at Rice#United States. Your outline looks like a good start, so I look forward to seeing the written article! For your section on pests/diseases, List of rice diseases may be of some help, and List of rice varieties may be of some help in your discussion of varieties grown in Arkansas. Please let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer (talk) 16:54, 3 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20110912 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI. Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Ose\fio is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI. Moonriddengirl (talk) 12:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Whoot! Serious day-brightener, being able to shut two down. :D Thank you very much for helping out with them. Obviously, this is an area with a lot of backlog, and I do very much appreciate your time. --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:03, 6 October 2011 (UTC)

Advice for new Wikipedia editors

Hi, Dana boomer. I've worked for some time on User:Philcha/Essays/Advice for new Wikipedia editors. I'm trying to approach the subject from the viewpoint of a new editor possibly seeing WP for the first time - in other words I think it must be one easy step at a time, starting from the new editor's starting position. I take WP:V, WP:NPOV and WP:NOR seriously, but am trying to make the whole process easier for the new editor. So I: use an informal style; emphasise techniques and tools that help new editors' work to be productive and pleasant; give the basis of the main policies and how to get advice about them; but not overload new editors with loads of details on policies, etc. I hope the essay will be worth publishing in main space, and even get a link for from the main "Welcome". Could you please comment at User talk:Philcha/Essays/Advice for new Wikipedia editors. --Philcha (talk) 21:44, 10 October 2011 (UTC)

Geography of Crop Plants Timeline

Thanks for the great suggestions you have given several of the students. they are all supposed to be starting their sandboxes, but they aren't all showing up on the course page. The timetable for the project is turning out to be fluid, but they have a firm Oct. 19th deadline to have a reasonable sandbox article up (short intro, outline, and references.) I'm really excited about all of the article topics they have selected. Any feedback that you can give--especially on wiki stuff--will be appreciated.Handlemk (talk) 15:55, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

2nd opinion

Please comment at User_talk:Handlemk#Class Project Information.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:53, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

CCI update

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/GiW is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

--Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

And another one done! Thank you. :D (I removed some content presumptively, but only when it looked suspicious.) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 11:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		For your persistent and very welcome attention to Contributor copyright investigations. Thank you for putting your time into this very backlogged and highly necessary work on Wikipedia. Moonriddengirl (talk) 11:25, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I'm trying to help, although I don't have much experience in the area. I've posted to the MILHIST talk page about some of the CCIs that involve military articles, and it looks like there's already been at least a little bit of response on various CCIs. Dana boomer (talk) 02:43, 15 October 2011 (UTC)

You seriously rock. :) I appreciate your bringing more attention to these, and I'm happy to have closed out another. (You are welcome to develop as much experience as you like. :D) --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 13:05, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

Abe Lincoln word count

When you have a spare moment can you determine the word count on Abraham Lincoln and post the results on the talk page? Another run for FAC will be happening before the year is out. TIA. Brad (talk) 19:23, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

WP:Contributor copyright investigations/Communicat

Hi Dana, I'm pretty sure that all of Communicat's edits have been undone or substantively re-written now, so this CCI could be marked as completed. The obvious copyvios were removed not long after they were added, and his other edits were reverted or re-written due to the POV problems they were riddled with. Cheers, Nick-D (talk) 18:43, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Replied on the MILHIST talk page. Dana boomer (talk) 19:35, 18 October 2011 (UTC)

Moving page into main space?

I read all the instructions on how to move a sandbox into the main area as well as info on the userpages, but I think I may have done something wrong. Now when I go to my page "Rice production in Arkansas," it says "This sandbox has been placed in the article namespace. Move this page into your userspace." Not sure what I'm supposed to do here? Any help is much appreciated. mccullaj (talk) 14:19, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

Hello again! It looks like you figured out the issue (the sandbox template on the top of the article). The article looks like a great start. One main comment - the information in the lead is supposed to be a summary of everything in the body, and so should not include information that is not found in the body. Please let me know if you have any further questions. Dana boomer (talk) 17:06, 26 October 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVII, September 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's featured and A-class Milhist content Book reviews: Nick-D and Ian Rose look at Australian air power Op-ed: Buggie111 ruminates about WikiLife and WikiDeath

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) 02:02, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Date format

Where date formatting is inconsistent, it is appropriate to make it consistent. It is not, on the other hand, appropriate to make it inconsistent -- which is what your edit, perhaps inadvertently, did. It is also appropriate for a US person to use US formatting. Thanks.--Epeefleche (talk) 23:54, 27 October 2011 (UTC)

Per Wikipedia:DATES, it is not necessary for article dates and access dates to be in the same format, which is what I'm assuming you're trying to do. In fact, one specific example that pages uses is "Jones, J. (September 20, 2008) ... Retrieved 2009-02-05.", which is the exact form the article uses. The access date formatting has nothing to do with country - that format can be found in use in the US and many other countries. Please stop changing this - either get a change to the MOS or leave it alone. Dana boomer (talk) 00:02, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The formatting was both inconsistent within the footnotes, and in the article as a whole (footnotes and text). My revision brought the footnotes into one format -- your revision had the effect of creating footnotes with different date formats, a clearly deprecated practice. It also, as you point out, has the effect of leaving the article a mess -- with different formats both within the footnotes, and between some footnotes as text. That is certainly an unhelpful result.--Epeefleche (talk) 00:08, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

First, as it is still in the MOS, I do not see where this is a "clearly deprecated practice". Second, there is no "mess". All dates in the article are month day, year or month year. All article dates within the references are month day, year or month year. All access dates are yyyy-mm-dd. This is an acceptable, internally-consistent system that I have used in articles that I have written for years, including articles that have been through the GAN and FAC processes. I happen to like this format, and as it is acceptable, there is NO reason for you to change it. I am not going to go through the articles that you have written and change the date format to how I like it, so please return the courtesy. Again, your edits DO NOT have MOS backing, so until they do, please revert yourself. Dana boomer (talk) 00:12, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

The system is consistent and works fine. As Dana notes, it's passed FAC (it's not a style I use, but it's consistent and that's all that's required.) Don't forget BRD here, you were reverted in your change, the correct solution was to discuss then, not to keep warring to get YOUR preference. It's a very inconsequential thing, but it's very annoying to have to deal with this sort of thing all the time. Ealdgyth - Talk 00:20, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

As to the substance, I disagree -- as explained in detail on the article's talk page, which I see you and another colleague watching this page have followed this discussion to. Welcome. As to the edit BRD, you have it wrong. Dana -- required by wp:ADMIN to model the best behavior -- reverted twice, without talkpage discussion, edit warring over style (precisely what the date guideline states in its intro is not acceptable. Dana wasn't the one who initiated talk page discussion. I was. I initiated it here, above, on this talkpage. And then when, despite the pendency of this discussion, I saw when looking at the page that Dana had again reverted to an inconsistent date format, I opened up discussion there as well, with a reference to this discussion. So, I was the one who initiated the discussion here, and then -- when edits moved back to the article -- there. Not Dana. I'm a little confused as to why you are addressing me vis-a-vis BRD, and not the person who failed to initiate the talk page discussion. If you are an impartial observer, I would think you would have done precisely the opposite. It's quite evident who started the "D", and who reverted twice while failing to do so.--Epeefleche (talk) 08:05, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

Epeefleche, your position is one that you can take to those who work on the MOS and discuss the overall policy, but to complain within a small group of individual articles and to attack someone for edits which are well within the parameters, particularly with insults such as calling something "a mess," is not helpful and does not assume good faith. Continuing a WP:TENDENTIOUS behavior here will not obtain the results you seem to be after, and the appropriate thing to do is to take the overall MOS guidelines to those who work on MOS guidelines. The rest of us just follow them. Montanabw^(talk) 19:13, 28 October 2011 (UTC)

CCI update

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Joyaaioxom is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

--Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 15:12, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

As promised

SVF Foundation. :) Steven Walling • talk 03:39, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Negative exponent symbols?

Hello again ma'am! I was wondering if you knew how to insert negative exponent symbols? Such as 12.34^-1 (but an actual little exponent symbol)? Thanks so much any help is much appreciated!!! mccullaj (talk) —Preceding undated comment added 19:56, 7 November 2011 (UTC).

Replied on your talk. Dana boomer (talk) 20:35, 7 November 2011 (UTC)

Ottoman empire research?

Dana, in your digging around for the Horses in WWI article, did you find any good stuff on the Egyptian government and the Ottoman Empire that also covered the late 1800s? The reason I ask is that the article Ali Pasha Sherif (noted as an important Arabian horse breeder, among other things) is getting some positive attention, but without the necessary citation and sourcing stuff. I'm trying to find a few RS's other than books on Arabian horses (which are not as ideally accurate as they could be, Wentworth and Gladys Brown Edwards are probably the only ones I'd trust to have the story straight as they understood it) Could you take a peek at it and see if you have knowledge of any sourcable works that might shed light on the various people mentioned? With the way the people's titles get confused with their given names, confusion reigns. (Pasha being a title, and everyone in Egypt who served the government seems to have been named "Ali" I think!). Feel free to pop your ideas on the talk page of the article (Ealdgyth had done this once, as well). I'm not saying I'll be getting around to fixing this article any time soon, but it will be good to round up what I can as I can. Thanks! Montanabw^(talk) 16:01, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. Dana boomer (talk) 17:38, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Help with Geog of Crop Plants wiki page

Hi Dana,
I have two questions pertaining to my wiki page, hopefully you can help me. First, I want to change the name of my article to 'Farming Systems in Costa Rica' but I cannot determine how to do so on my main page. Should I just make a new page? Lastly, I want to add this map (http://www.fao.org/countryprofiles/Maps/CRI/01/fs/index.html) showing farming systems onto my page but I cannot figure out how to. If you could possibly help me out that would be awesome! Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Diverdw (talk • contribs) 17:06, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Replied on your talk. Dana boomer (talk) 17:32, 9 November 2011 (UTC)

Heads up...

Requested pages on their way to you. Three parts. I got a few extra pages around the ones you wanted, to make sure you got context. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:00, 17 November 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful, and thank you very much! I'll work on integrating these tonight, and for you (or anyone else who is interested) I hope to soon be (finally!) taking American Livestock Breeds Conservancy to FAC. So any final comments would be much appreciated! Dana boomer (talk) 21:05, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Cheering you on, Dana! Montanabw^(talk) 22:54, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

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) 06:32, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

Invitation to take part in Wikipedia research

Hello,

I am doing research on Wikipedia in multiple languages to see how different Wikipedia websites enable people differently to act and contribute in their ways. A brief description of the study can be found on our project page on Meta-Wiki. The results would give guidelines for further development of Wikipedia in less developed languages.

As an active member of Wikipedia community, you are invited to take part in the study and share your experience about and understanding of Wikipedia with us. It would take 30 to 60 minutes of your time to have an online conversation about Wikipedia. I would be delighted to hear any of your ideas or feedback about the study. Please feel free to contact me with your questions and concerns related to this study and your participation. You can also find the email address on the project page.--WikiTafa (talk) 23:27, 18 November 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVIII, October 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; medal recipients; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D analyzes three books from Osprey Publishing Review essay: Nick-D reviews the new Bundeswehr Military History Museum

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) 08:01, 28 November 2011 (UTC)

War horses

I just saw Horses in World War I and it's a great article! Great job! Are you going to see the movie "War Horse", also on WWI horses, that's about to come out? PumpkinSky talk 02:05, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

Eastern Theater of the American Civil War

Hi Dana, would you chime in at Talk:Eastern Theater of the American Civil War? The original author is puzzled at this being called a copyvio. Cheers,
⋙–Berean–Hunter—► 02:08, 5 December 2011 (UTC)

GA review of Spanish conquest of Guatemala

Hi Dana, many thanks for the review. I've gone through it point by point and await any further comments... Best regards, Simon Burchell (talk) 20:23, 6 December 2011 (UTC)

Interesting...

But certainly something most horse people would go "Duh, no shit!" to... article Ealdgyth - Talk 20:26, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

"They behave, learn and memorize better when learning is associated with a positive situation." Really, who knew? Yeah, interesting but intuitive for horse-folk (at least the good ones). Might be useful source material if we ever get around to the Equine behavior article, though. Dana boomer (talk) 21:49, 8 December 2011 (UTC)

Supports other stuff we have on memory, I think I saw the same study in The Horse. Appears to be a lot of "no duh" studies out recently. My favorite was the grandson of Ray Hunt who goes to school at Montana State and got a grant to prove that giving horses too much cheap grain makes them hot.  :-P But I suppose in a world of fewer and fewer people who grow up around animals, maybe today's no duh studies will save the lives of the horse in the future. Don't know...

Main page appearance: Andalusian horse

This is a note to let the main editors of Andalusian horse know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on December 15, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/December 15, 2011. 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 Andalusian horse is a horse breed developed in the Iberian Peninsula. Its ancestors have been present on the Iberian Peninsula for thousands of years. The Andalusian has been recognized as an individual breed since the 15th century, and its conformation has changed very little over the centuries. Throughout its history, it has been known for its prowess as a war horse, and was prized by the nobility. During the 19th century, warfare, disease and crossbreeding reduced herd numbers dramatically, and despite some recovery in the late 19th century, the trend continued into the early 20th century. Exports of Andalusians were restricted until the 1960s, but the breed has since spread throughout the world, despite still-low population numbers. Strongly built, and compact yet elegant, Andalusians have long, thick manes and tails. Their most common coat color is gray, although they can be found in many other colors. They are known for their intelligence, sensitivity and docility. The Andalusian is closely related to the Lusitano of Portugal, and has been used to develop many other breeds, especially in Europe and the Americas. Modern Andalusians are used for many equestrian activities, including dressage, show jumping and driving. The breed is also used extensively in movies, especially historical pictures and fantasy epics. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

FML. That is all I have to say on this subject. Dana boomer (talk) 23:41, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

It will forever remain a mystery to me why anyone would want their article to appear on the main page; very little good ever comes of it. Malleus Fatuorum 23:47, 9 December 2011 (UTC)

FML??? New acroymn to me... And my sympathies... Ealdgyth - Talk 01:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

wikt:FML, although the website is slightly more amusing. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:27, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Looked up the links, LOL, a good addition to WTF, it seems. I should be working at the office on the 15th and can help patrol. Malleus, put up your dukes and help us out. I fully anticipate a full-blown "it's a PRE" spat to erupt akin to the one about the oriental origins of the TB the day we had Thoroughbred on the main page, the time at which my esteemed colleague JLAN became a presence in our lives. I'm braced for a serious PITA to arrive. Will need multiple helpers to avoid anyone getting into 3RR trouble. Montanabw^(talk) 18:56, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

There's some degree of immunity to 3RR on TFA day, but I do recall being blocked briefly for 3RR on one or another earlier this year. There's no consistency here. For myself, I just don't want ever again to see something I've helped write on the main page. Malleus Fatuorum 19:29, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Probably why I've never had an FA that wasn't a team effort. Doing a GA solo scares me bad enough as it is. Montanabw^(talk) 19:32, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I've put it on my watchlist. Courage mon brave Malleus Fatuorum 19:38, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Barnstar

	The Working Woman's Barnstar
	Thank you for your thoughtful and thorough GA review of Spanish conquest of Guatemala - it is a better article as a result. Simon Burchell (talk) 09:32, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much, Simon! Dana boomer (talk) 13:36, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Request

Would you mind giving me until Wednesday, December 14 to fix the issues present in Sir Edmund Andros? Sorry for the delay, and thanks very much for your comments. DCItalk 01:25, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Yes, of course! I'm still working on the review, and will be posting more comments as the evening progresses. Dana boomer (talk) 01:30, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks. DCItalk 02:19, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

A new barnstar for your collection

		The Rhodesian Barnstar
		For your excellent review of Mathew Charles Lamb, here is a barnstar that you probably do not yet have. Well, you have it now. Thanks! I have nominated the article at FAC and hope to have the gold star on it soon. —Cliftonianthe orangey bit 02:29, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

Thank you Cliftonian! You are correct, that is definitely not one that I have been given before :) Dana boomer (talk) 15:03, 11 December 2011 (UTC)

John C. Colt

Just wanted to say I appreciate the help with the article. When I first wrote it, I had never heard of him previously, I was actually reading a book about his brother, Samuel Colt in hope of improving that article and read about the murder in a sentence. I googled him and found all this source material. I guess when I write, I take things for granted on what people know because of the source material. Thanks for helping fill in a few gaps and such...I have had it up at GA since September or October and it is currently under review. Your edits have been extremely helpful. Thanks again.--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 00:23, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I know the feeling of taking reader knowledge for granted - I also sometimes have outside editors point out gaps that should contain information, but that I left blank because the underlying knowledge is for me so deeply ingrained as to be intuitive. My prose and grammar skills on the other hand...not always intuitive :) The backlog was getting a bit scary at GAN - this backlog drive seems to be taking care of the worst of it for now, though - and I'm happy to be helping now that I have a bit more free time. It's a subject that I enjoy reading about, and I'm glad that you find my edits helpful - I see that you've also been working on the other Colt brother, so hopefully we'll also see that article up at GAN in the future! Dana boomer (talk) 00:43, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, I made some changes based on your reccomendations and found out a few other things, too...like Colt's son actually inheriting $2 million when Samuel Colt died. I had read that Samuel Colt paid for the kid's education but saw that as a brother looking out for a brother's orphan, leaving him 5-10% of his net worht with the rest going only to his wife and brother-in-law seems like he may have been more than just a nephew. (Especially when no other nieces or nephews were left in the will).--Mike - Μολὼν λαβέ 02:06, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks again for reviewing and passing it. I'll look into the sister angle, it might make a good addition for FAC. I do know he joined the Corps to "take his mind off it", still not sure why she did it, though.--Mike -Μολὼν λαβέ 01:40, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Peregrine

I'll do what I can, and I'll let the bird project know, thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:55, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful. I'll drop some more comments on the talk page later today, then. Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 16:05, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Mea Culpa

Sorry about the revert. I saw the beginning of the problem. Montanabw^(talk) 00:06, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem, I kind of figured that. Like I said, some of what JLAN added was good info, and Ealdgyth and I cleaned up the rest. Dana boomer (talk) 00:10, 15 December 2011 (UTC)

Manipuri Pony GA

Hi Dana boomer, how are you? I hope all is well. I've just finished reviewing Manipuri Pony for GA. It was a very interesting read! There just a couple of tiny points I wasn't sure about so I have put it on hold for the time being. I was also bold, and made a number of copy-edits. If you don't agree with any of them, by all means, feel free to change them back. OK, I'll wait to hear from you when you've addressed the two points. Take care, Moisejp (talk) 04:32, 16 December 2011 (UTC)

Manipuri Pony has now passed. Congratulations! Moisejp (talk) 04:31, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Wonderful - thank you! Dana boomer (talk) 14:26, 17 December 2011 (UTC)

Large Black pig

Hey Dana, I'd be happy to give you some feedback. I browsed the article on my phone yesterday, and it looks pretty good overall but I did notice some gaps in coverage. I'll drop by the talk page there soon. Happy holidays, Steven Walling • talk 18:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)

Holiday wishes...

		Happy Holidays
		Wishing you and yours a Happy Holiday Season, from the horse and bishop person. May the year ahead be productive and troll-free. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:27, 21 December 2011 (UTC)Ealdgyth - Talk 17:25, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

What a beautiful image. Thank you for the good wishes, and I hope you and your family have a wonderful Christmas and New Years! Dana boomer (talk) 16:04, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Big Hugz to You

	Animal-lover hugz
	Thanks for the backup! I was getting to within about twelve hours of "losing it"! Pesky (talk …stalk!) 14:01, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

LOL, no problem. You are quite correct that he needs to read IDHT and TLDR. I'll try to be a bit more active in the conversation now, if needed, rather than just lurking in the background like I have been doing. Dana boomer (talk) 16:03, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Remember me with That Roan Question? Heh! The truly frustrating thing for me is that, if we can get through to this editor (and I'm still on the fence as to whether it's possible or not) we have someone who can actually string words together into a comprehensible format. Maybe a leetle verbose ...... but this guy/gal can communicate. We need passion like that on lovely little tasks like copyediting and source-hunting :P Give this person the right unwritten article, and some motivation and tips, and I bet they could turn out a solo GA within two months. Pesky (talk …stalk!) 18:22, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Agreed, but I don't think you ever refused to consider/believe any of the policies we asked you to read...you just agreed that although your information was correct, it wasn't sourced anywhere, so until we can get UC Davis to do a study and publish the results, it doesn't get to go in the articles... (or something along the lines, the exact conversation was a while ago, but my point is, you were never into tendentious editing/IDHT discussion). I also agree, however, that the more contributors that we can covert from newbies to policy-following content contributors who understand teamwork, the better. I've got a string of GAs and FAs under my belt, but every time I look at the number of stub-class equine articles, or equine articles with cleanup templates on them, I realize that I've barely even made a dent. And that's not even considering all of the poorly written and sourced articles out there in other subject areas I'm interested in... The more help in turning those into even B-class articles, the better. Dana boomer (talk) 21:46, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

Attack of the "killer B's"? By the way, I'm back online now. Gone a couple days and look what happens...  :-P Montanabw^(talk) 02:39, 26 December 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXIX, November 2011

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors – MHotY coming; contest results Articles: The month's Featured and A-class content Book reviews: Nick-D looks at the Congolese Wars Review essay: Ian Rose goes to El Alamein Op-ed: DCI's call to revitalize WikiProject History

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Ian Rose (talk) and Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 20:21, 27 December 2011 (UTC)

re: The Satanic Bible

Hey Dana, thanks for letting me know. I can see why my preliminary review was deleted -- I hadn't made any further attempt to review the article since I volunteered to do it. Although I have been active during that time, other things have claimed my attention. To be honest, I rather forgot about it. However, my preliminary review stated that the article is missing important information about the book itself, such as publication history/sales/reception/etc. -- important stuff! -- so I'm slightly miffed that the page was deleted. It's a shame helpful comments have been lost in the ether because of a misunderstanding; if I had been contacted, I would stepped aside for the review and simply moved my suggestions for expansion to the talk page for consideration. I'm not feeling the reviewer vibe at the moment, so I don't think I'll be picking it up again. The hastiness with which the GA1 page was deleted is also kind of a turn off. I'd like to think I'm an honorable contributor, after all. Ah, well. Sorry for rambling, and thanks again. :) María (yllosubmarine) 02:50, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

No worries, Wizardman already restored my comments to the talk page. No harm done. Thanks! María (yllosubmarine) 14:03, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

No problem, glad it was sorted. Dana boomer (talk) 14:10, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Flatlist at WP:FA

Please have a look at Wikipedia talk:Featured articles#List markup. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:13, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

You've got mail...

Check it! And Happy New Year! Ealdgyth - Talk 02:47, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Replied, but off to bed now. Have a great New Year yourself! Dana boomer (talk) 03:04, 31 December 2011 (UTC)