User talk:Hawkeye7

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Wikipe-tan the Library of Babel.png

Archives:

2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011 · 2012 · 2013 · 2014 · 2015
RfA candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report
RfB candidate S O N S% Ending (UTC) Time left Dups? Report

No RfXs since 01:16, 6 February 2016 (UTC).—cyberbot ITalk to my owner:Online

Contents

2016[edit]

Happy New Year .jpg
Happy New Year 2016!
Did you know ... that back in 1885, Wikipedia editors wrote Good Articles with axes, hammers and chisels?

Thank you for your contributions to this encyclopedia using 21st century technology. I hope you don't get any unneccessary blisters.
   – Cullen328 Let's discuss it 04:45, 31 December 2015 (UTC)

Happy New Year, Hawkeye7![edit]

Spread the WikiLove; use {{subst:Happy New Year 2016}} to send this message

George Grimson Article[edit]

Hawkeye7,

Hope you had a good New year. Recently, you assessed the George Grimson article as "C-class", but yet it remains a "stub-class" article. Adamdaley (talk) 23:39, 1 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Jacob L. Devers[edit]

The article Jacob L. Devers you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Jacob L. Devers for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 22:43, 2 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur V. Peterson[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Seth Neddermeyer[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Seth Neddermeyer you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose (talk) 05:00, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

Template links[edit]

WP:NOPIPE and WP:NOTBROKEN aside, a redirect in a navbox is broken, as it does not display correctly on the target page. The link is supposed to be a bold 'non-link' on the page in question - if the link is a redirect, it doesn't do that, but instead is still is an active link, making it look like there is a different page for the subject. - The Bushranger One ping only 10:59, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

But... I am looking at it, and it does wok that way. I have put it back. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:29, 6 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 January 2016[edit]

WikiCup 2016: Game On![edit]

We are about to enter the second week of the 2016 WikiCup. The most recent player to sign up brings the current total to 101 contestants. Signups close on 5 February. If you’re interested, you can join this year's WikiCup here.

We are aware that in some areas the scoring bot’s numbers are a little bit off (i.e., overly generous) and are working to have that corrected as soon as possible.--MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 18:08, 7 January 2016 (UTC)

Oct - Dec 15 Quarterly Article Reviews[edit]

Wiki-stripe2.svg Military history service award
On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, I hereby award you this for your contribution of 4 FA, A-Class, Peer and/or GA reviews during the period October to December 2015. Thank you for your efforts! AustralianRupert (talk) 02:49, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Seth Neddermeyer[edit]

The article Seth Neddermeyer you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Seth Neddermeyer for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ian Rose -- Ian Rose (talk) 04:01, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Talkback[edit]

Nuvola apps edu languages.svg
Hello, Hawkeye7. You have new messages at Template:Did you know nominations/Sharyn Canyon.
Message added 06:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Request to revisit the discussion. North America1000 06:54, 10 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-02[edit]

16:59, 11 January 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Norman Hilberry[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 12 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Chicago Pile-1[edit]

The article Chicago Pile-1 you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:Chicago Pile-1 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 03:01, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 January 2016[edit]

Tech News: 2016-03[edit]

17:56, 18 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-10 Graphite Reactor[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article X-10 Graphite Reactor you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. Time2wait.svg This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-10 Graphite Reactor[edit]

The article X-10 Graphite Reactor you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold Symbol wait.svg. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:X-10 Graphite Reactor for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 08:40, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of X-10 Graphite Reactor[edit]

The article X-10 Graphite Reactor you nominated as a good article has passed Symbol support vote.svg; see Talk:X-10 Graphite Reactor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 22:41, 20 January 2016 (UTC)

Ok, so one of them is still wrong.[edit]

I refer to this RV. "commenced construction of the plutonium semiworks, codenamed X-10" or "[X-10] was the world's second artificial nuclear reactor". The lede bounces back and forth. I don't believe the chemical extraction side was referred to as X-10, and since that is definitely part of the semi works then my edit was correct, or the rest of the lede is wrong. So which is it? Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:29, 21 January 2016 (UTC)

The first one is right. X-10 was the codename for the plutonium semiworks, of which the reactor was part. So what do we have?
"The X-10 Graphite Reactor was the world's second artificial nuclear reactor"
"In September 1942, Compton asked a physicist, Martin D. Whitaker, to form a skeleton operating staff for X-10"
"By March 1944, there were some 1,500 people working at X-10"
"Exterior of the Graphite Reactor at the X-10 site"
"the cost of construction at X-10" (Clear here that we are talking about the entire facility)
"X-10 operated as a plutonium production plant until January 1945"
"X-10 supplied the Los Alamos Laboratory with the first significant samples of plutonium"
"The X-10 chemical separation plant"
"The X-10 Graphite Reactor was shut down on November 4, 1963"
"One reactor of similar design to the X-10 Graphite Reactor is still in operation today"
I think the wording is consistent. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:03, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
So the chemical plant beside the reactor is also known as "the X-10 Graphite Reactor"? Maury Markowitz (talk) 23:23, 21 January 2016 (UTC)
No, it is the "X-10 chemical separation plant". (Am I missing something here?) Hawkeye7 (talk) 04:09, 22 January 2016 (UTC)

"German Air Force" or "Bundeswehr Luftwaffe"[edit]

I think it would be good if you would voice your opinion at Wikipedia:Categories for discussion/Log/2016 January 20. Thanks MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:54, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

Salamaua–Lae campaign[edit]

G'day Hawkeye, I've been trying to reference the Salamaua–Lae campaign article this weekend, but have come up blank with the base development information in the Aftermath section of the article. Given the sources you were able to bring to the Battle of Milne Bay article, I was wondering if you might be able to check your library to see if you can add the last couple of references. Any help you can give would be greatly appreciated. Thanks for your time. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 08:53, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

No worries. Looks like I wrote it back in March 2007. I know where it all comes from. Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:41, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Great! Thanks. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:45, 24 January 2016 (UTC)
Yes check.svg Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 January 2016[edit]

Whenever you're ready[edit]

—Ready whenever you are. Don't feel any need to rush. And good luck. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 00:46, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-04[edit]

16:39, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png This is a very special beer. It refills daily for those in the midst of a request of adminship. Cheers! MurderByDeletionism"bang!" 18:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Just what I've always wanted! Thank you! Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:49, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Edited your nom[edit]

[24] I'm assuming you didn't actually memorize Russian poetry by a small Iranian village. But notifying you, just in case you actually did. (I guess there could have been an anonymous Russian poet known only for living there, so becoming known by...) --GRuban (talk) 22:57, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for that. In the wake of the Vietnam War, the educational authorities decided that the Cold War was lost, and that we should all learn Russian. I found it a difficult subject, not least because I missed a term as a result of a surgical operation. You could pass by passing the exam, or by memorising and reciting a Pushkin poem. So that's what we did. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:49, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXVIII, January 2016[edit]

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:24, 26 January 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 January 2016[edit]

Congrats[edit]

Congratulation Hawkeye7, you're gonna be an admin! (N0n3up (talk) 04:04, 29 January 2016 (UTC))

It's not over yet. Hawkeye7 (talk) 06:07, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry[edit]

I've opposed your bid to become an admin, with a degree of regret and awkwardness. My best to you all the same. Tony (talk) 13:19, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Sorry here, too, for not voting, but I won't be voting in any 2016 RfAs because of my work with relevant RfCs. (I suspect we'll be seeing several more big ones this year.) Best of luck, Hawkeye (and Tony, good to see you here). - Dank (push to talk) 16:15, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
Thanks Dan. One thing that is worth a second look is what bits are needed for ArbCom. There was a couple of hasty RfCs when it was thought that I might win a seat; but it looks now like it has been shelved until next year. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:30, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
I've considered closing RfCs related to Arbcom, mostly because what Arbcom does and doesn't do has a big impact on RfA (as you may have recently noticed). But I'm probably out of my depth there. - Dank (push to talk) 22:39, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Hey, whaddaya trying to do? Make me change my vote?[edit]

diff | hist) . . Bill Mauldin‎; 22:40 . . (-2)‎ . . ‎Hawkeye7 (talk | contribs)‎ (Have their own article now)

For shame, for shame! Anmccaff (talk) 23:51, 29 January 2016 (UTC)

Neumann[edit]

Sadly I don't have the time to review the article in a way that would do it justice, but congrats on tackling it looks fantastic. --Errant (chat!) 11:03, 31 January 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-05[edit]

21:02, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

no need for thanks <g>[edit]

I was proud to support your RfA. Collect (talk) 21:14, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Per your inquiry, the answer was probably in part here. But I'll be trying again, probably next spring or so...maybe summer, probably after the Belmont Stakes and the flurry of horse article editing surrounding the triple crown races concludes. I'd most certainly by interested in your input on how I might do a better job next time or if there are ways I could handle things better. Montanabw(talk) 23:04, 1 February 2016 (UTC)
I am in total agreement with the above sentiments. It was my pleasure to support your candidacy. I don't quite understand the process or why things work out the way they do, but I tend to believe that timing has a lot to do with it. Atsme📞📧 23:59, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Congrats! Ditto on Collect's comment. I still think you'd be a good arb - go for it next year. Smallbones(smalltalk) 03:27, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

RfA[edit]

I expected the decision to go against you. I hope the Bureaucrats come to the right decision. I will ask one to have a look at your RfA...SethWhales talk 23:24, 1 February 2016 (UTC)

Does this mean it's in the bag?Keith-264 (talk) 07:56, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
See Wikipedia:Requests for adminship/Hawkeye7 2/Bureaucrat chat Nick-D (talk) 09:51, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Ah wellKeith-264 (talk) 20:48, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Working at DYK absent the full toolset[edit]

I wonder if the DYK-relevant pages could be set to template-protection, and you could leverage your template-editor rights? Do you think that would fly, from a technical or consensus perspective? Or am I completely off the mark... –xenotalk 02:46, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't think so. Why don't you do it? Hawkeye7 (talk) 10:34, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Do what? Certainly not present the argument for it, I'm a relatively unknown around those parts. Which pages would need to be template-protected instead of fully-protected for you to work there? –xenotalk 13:50, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I don't know if we can do that, as the protection comes via the cascading protection from the main page. I don't know enough about such things? I guess it could be request to lift that cascading protection? If possible, it would definitely be a very good idea at looking at. Harrias talk 17:41, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
Yes, it would involved lifting the cascading protection on the main page, so I don't think it is practical. By "do it", I meant "approve the DYK hooks". Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:16, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
We could probably change the cascading full-protection to cascading template-editor protection, but the question then becomes - is the community comfortable opening up editing of the mainpage to another 122 users who weren't specifically vetted for such a role? –xenotalk 00:21, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Not sure if that's appropriate[edit]

Maybe I'm being overly paranoid, I can see how this could have happened unintentionally. But I don't think it's entirely appropriate to notify/thank among others the 4 bureaucrats ([39] [40] [41] [42]) who were positive towards your nomination, because they are still in the process of deciding the result. Anyway, I just felt I had to get that off my chest, and I don't want to cause any hassle. Feel free to remove this comment after you have read it. -- intgr [talk] 11:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

(talk page stalker) Hawkeye thanked Avi for his work on the RFA, not his support (which Avi did not offer in any case), and the other three crats have recused themselves from the discussion, so the point, however well-meant, seems moot. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:11, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

I don't make this offer to everyone[edit]

You're a great editor who's feeling rather cheesed off at the moment. I get it. RfX is tough, even for successful candidates.

Take the advice on my usertalk and come chat with me in March. Because if you choose to, you can turn this around, and I'll happily turn this into a bluelink with a nomination in a few months if you do. --Dweller (talk) 13:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Retirement..... really?[edit]

So what if you don't get the position as an admin? Think of all of the readers you help out/make smile when you improve articles on the topics that interest you. Shouldn't that be enough motivation? - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 14:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Please don't leave over it. Take some time out if you need to but don't leave for good. You'll be sorely missed :)--5 albert square (talk) 20:33, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
It would be more motivating if I got some feedback from them. As it is, all I can see is page hit counts. But thanks. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:47, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
+1. Did you really join the project just to be an admin? Surely you joined to edit articles? --GRuban (talk) 20:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
I did. But I do everything. Without I admin toolbox, I am constantly stymied. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:37, 2 February 2016 (UTC)
We once had such a feedback mechanism, but it had flaws. Maybe this is something we should look back into? Mz7 (talk) 22:14, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

2007[edit]

Back in 2007, one RfA was basically not deemed successful with 201 supports and 71 opposes, but the usual RfA in those days had far more votes than any recent ones - even with auto-notification to editors. The issue then was (get this) how opposed the candidate was to off-Wiki sites that must not be named <g>. Collect (talk) 14:44, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Your RfA results[edit]

I regret to inform you that your recent request for adminship was closed as "no consensus to promote". I encourage you to review the comments in the discussion and on the talk page to see if there are areas in which you could make changes. This may allow you to have a successful RfA in the future. Thank you for your patience during the bureaucrat chat and during the RfA process itself. ···日本穣 · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 18:53, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

You will make a fine admin. Must give it another go! - Ret.Prof (talk) 13:51, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A beer for you![edit]

Export hell seidel steiner.png Sorry about the result, but thanks for bearing "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune" for the betterment of Wikipedia. And thanks for your note. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 19:04, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

To cut the b.s., I think the reason for the failure was because you were in the lower half of the 65-75% discretionary zone, it's probably as simple as that. Whatever the 'crats might say it's basically a numbers game. A no consensus result means you could try again, and probably pass, in six months time. Now I do think you could answered the questions a little differently, please contact me if you like for my views on a strategy. But if you've had enough of RfAs I understand, you have to be pretty brave to put yourself through that. Which makes you a bigger person than many. --Jules (Mrjulesd) 19:17, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Bugger[edit]

Sorry to see it went the way it did. I didn't expect it to be plain sailing but I wouldn't have nominated you if I didn't think you had a chance, nor if I didn't think you'd be a good admin. Okay, you got a lot of opposition; some of it we foresaw, some of it we didn't. There is certainly a feeling that you haven't learnt from the evens of four years ago, or haven't moved on, or haven't shown enough contrition. But remember very nearly two hundred of your peers supported you. That's quite an incredible turnout. The lengthy and well thought-out rationales from many of those editors, among them some of the most respected editors on Wikipedia, show that you have the trust of a significant majority of the community. Beyond that, even most of the opposers spoke highly of you and praised your work and your dedication to Wikipedia. To me, it says a lot about you that even many of your detractors went out of their way to praise your contribution. Besides, most admin work is boring grunt work that's forgotten about in seconds whereas you article work will be around in one form or another for decades. People will remember Wikipedia as an encyclopaedia—not necessarily a perfect one, but one that could at least provide a decent overview of any subject imaginable—not for all the vandals that were blocked, and that's down in no small part to you. So my advice would be not to focus on the final tally, but to dust yourself off and do what you do best. And if you find yourself in Blighty, let me know and I'll buy you a drink. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:20, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks Harry. I'd really like to take you up on that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:40, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

And your retirement plan is......????[edit]

I'm sorry the RFA didn't work out. This time. You're the reason I got my first FA. Absolutely the reason, because you encouraged me to go forward with the effort. I was at the point of completely throwing in the towel. If it wasn't for your being there at the exact correct moment to encourage me, I'd still be diddling around in the shadows somewhere. And besides that, you're a coordinator at WP MH - fulfill the term. Your content contributions on the Manhattan Project have been somewhat extraordinary. So, what's more important - the small handful who opposed at RFA, or those educators out there who are quite probably using your articles to teach students about the Manhattan Project. Carry on and try again later. We salute you for your tireless contributions. — Maile (talk) 22:58, 2 February 2016 (UTC)

Well put, Maile. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

DYK for Charles V. Shank[edit]

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Commiserations...[edit]

G'day Hawkeye. I am sorry to see your RfA ended up as it did. I followed it closely and winced at every new oppose – it truly can be a dreadful and unforgiving process. I hope that the last week or so hasn't dampened your enthusiasm for Wikipedia, content creation, or your eventual return to admin ranks. Just remember... we all love you at Milhist! Warm regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:19, 3 February 2016 (UTC)

Do we ever... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:35, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
I'd third Peacemaker and Ian. I hope that you don't let the folks with an ancient grudge and love of piling onto admins get you down - you're a better editor then them all stuck together. Nick-D (talk) 07:30, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
I am sorry that your request for the tools did not succeed; although the !vote was about two to one in favour, we do know that it is not a simple mumerical majority decision. unfortunately, while a number of well-respected admins supported you, a similar number opposed. I would be happy to support again after a reasonable interval. --Anthony Bradbury"talk" 13:11, 3 February 2016 (UTC)
Hawkeye7 I too am saddened that your Request had a no consensus. Sometime in the future. I will definitely cast my vote for you later. Anyways, keep on updating this Wikipedia!

Oh, no! Not another tribble![edit]

~The Special Wikipedian Tribble Award~
Go forth and multiply, we need more 'pedians like you!
You're a very special Wikipedian in my book. Your contributions to the encyclopedia - the many GAs, FAs and DYKs you've collaborated on are exemplary - and well, I have a special respect for editors who go that extra mile to produce quality work. Thank you for all you do and all you've done to make editing an enjoyable experience. Atsme📞📧 03:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)


Other fun banners are available at [43]

And Hawkeye7, I want to extend an invitation to you (it's actually a plea for help) to collaborate on a new project I just created, WP:Project Accuracy, for which I'd like to recruit other FP/GA/DYK editors to join. I'm in the embryonic stages of development - just now working on the header but I'm not very well-versed on changing syntax in templates, so I will probably just create a page header of my own design. I'm not sure why the TP isn't connecting or what categories to include or .... well, any help you can provide will be greatly appreciated. Atsme📞📧 03:07, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

A tribble! Always wanted one. Always willing to help out. Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:18, 4 February 2016 (UTC)
I've got an ~in use~ template at the top of the page but you can ignore it if you see anything that needs fixing. Oh, and what I'd like to do is establish a 5 person PAC = Project Accuracy Coordinators who will oversee the project, and vet the fact-check promotion candidates who apply. This project is actually the foundation for a much bigger plan I proposed to WMF during their current community consultation re: their "Reach strategy. My suggestion was in regards to protection and promotion of articles that have passed stringent reviews and accuracy checks (and will carry our project seal which you can see at the project page). I tested the waters a tiny bit at Drmies TP, and now I'm hoping to get a good team together comprising content creators/FA participants/reviewers for PAC. Let me know if you're interested. Atsme📞📧 07:48, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

License tagging for File:Harrie Massey.jpg[edit]

Thanks for uploading File:Harrie Massey.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information.

To add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia. For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 13:05, 4 February 2016 (UTC)

Canberra meetup invitation[edit]

Hi, you're invited to the Canberra meetup which will take place at King O'Malley's Irish Pub in Civic on 17 February 2016. Bidgee (talk) 01:34, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 5[edit]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Landing at Lae, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page LCM (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:43, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Source review[edit]

Hey Hawkeye, do you have some spare time to perform a source review on Ride the Lightning for formatting and reliability? The FA nomination is here. I usually wait for the FA coordinators to make a request at the project's talk page, but I want to get pass the image/source procedures as quickly as possible, so I can focus on other issues. Thanks in advance.--Retrohead (talk) 23:04, 5 February 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for your support[edit]

Peace dove.svg Peacemaker67 RfA Appreciation award
Thank you for participating and supporting at my RfA. It was very much appreciated, and I am humbled that the community saw fit to trust me with the tools. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:13, 6 February 2016 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/Nimrod (computing)[edit]

Wondering if you can tick off this one? It looks like it doesn't need a QPQ, so hopefully an easy affair! Jolly Ω Janner 06:04, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Hawkeye7 (talk) 07:35, 7 February 2016 (UTC)

Tech News: 2016-06[edit]

18:58, 8 February 2016 (UTC)

The Signpost: 03 February 2016[edit]