Jump to content

User talk:TomStar81/Archive 12

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


Archive 5←Archive 10Archive 11Archive 12Archive 13Archive 14Archive 15

elections

Thanks for the recommendation (if that's the right word!). I'm honestly not sure, but I'll give it a thought over the weekend - the deadline seems to be Monday night, so hopefully that won't be a problem... Shimgray | talk | 10:08, 10 September 2010 (UTC)

...thanks! I suppose I should actually read up on what I've let myself in for, now... Shimgray | talk | 00:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

ITN

--Mkativerata (talk) 08:14, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Co-ord

Thanks Tom, I actually just posted on the co--ordinator page about it. I'd like to, but I can't commit much more time than I do already... Ranger Steve (talk) 20:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

As head co-rdinator, would you be happy with me contributing about as much as I do now if I stood for the a new term? If its not enough I understand, but seeing as there's a fairly average turnout, I'm happy to stand if a low contributing co-ord is considered useful. Ranger Steve (talk) 20:38, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 September 2010

MILHIST election

Thanks for the prod. I've been busy with the usual hassles during the opening week of school, but now that things have settled down, I've thrown my hat into the ring. I think that this time around, if elected, I'll be able to contribute more as a coordinator, since I have more free time on my hands. Thanks, --Patar knight - chat/contributions 00:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Signpost PC discussion

Since you were wondering about the tallying of the support for each individual option at the pending changes poll, I thought you might find the stats I posted at Wikipedia talk:Wikipedia Signpost/2010-09-13/News and notes interesting. Cheers, - Kingpin13 (talk) 11:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at The ed17's talk page.
Message added 05:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Iowa class battleship was nominated at ACR by an editor without consulting anybody -MBK004 05:58, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

Courageous

The Barnstar of Integrity
For willingly throwing yourself into the meatgrinder that is WP:FPC with the Baghdad Airstrike Video, and for defending the occasionally absurd oppose rationales with calm civility, honour and integrity. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 20:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


My rationale for giving this requires a bit of an explanation. I happened to stumble upon the FPC for File:CollateralMurder.ogv earlier today, and have to say that pouring through the debate/shooting-gallery was rather eye-opening in and of itself. While it revealed a great deal about the reasons I don't nominate Featured Pictures, it also offered a window into people's personal feelings about the video and what it represents. It morphed into a debate not on the quality of the video/soundfile, but a debate on the very nature of the attack and what the leaked footage represents. One even went as far as to imply that you were committing treason by nominating this for FPC, and that those who leaked the footage deserve to die.

It was Churchill who said that "in war, truth is so precious that she must always be attended by a bodyguard of lies". We've gotten used to being lied to in war; let's be honest. Whether it's hopelessly biased news reporting (and that's across the spectrum, from rightwing groups like FOX to comparitively leftwing groups like MSNBC), the withholding of documents and files, the shrouding of the actions of our soldiers in secrecy (especially in cases like My Lai or Abu Ghraib or Haditha), and the accusation of "treason" against those who dear to lift the veil of secrecy. When the veil is lifted - as is the case here - controversy, emotion and hysteria are virtually inevitable. There were many cases in some of the rationales (particularly the one concerning treason and the death penalty) where it was appallingly obvious that people were being baited into a fight. You didn't fight back with emotion, however. You defended yourself with WP policy, guidelines, and cold, hard and steadfast logic and reason. You performed far better than I would have, and you willingly threw yourself into the meatgrinder. I admire you for it.

As you yourself admitted in the nomination, the realities laid bare in the video are unpleasant and horrific. They're not realities I enjoy having to accept, and I imagine even moreso for you and other American citizens. Many of those who got particularly heated in the nom - though they did not explicitly mention it - could not accept those realities, and did not want to. As you mentioned in the nom, your eyes were opened. This award is for having the courage - and the balls - to open the eyes of others. The truth - cold, hard, brutal, and often unpleasant truth - pushes no agenda save itself.

If, for some insane reason, I should ever end up in El Paso, I owe you a drink. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 20:07, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!

The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies talk 19:44, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 September 2010

Wikipedia:Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage

Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:51, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

Article Alert

The bot for Wikipedia:Article alerts is supposedly going to be coming back online soon. This would be a great way to automate a great many MILHIST tasks. I advise you to bring it ut with your fellow coordinators and look into it. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 16:15, 21 September 2010 (UTC)

GA to FA

Can you go directly from GA to FAC without ACR? WikiCopterRadioChecklistFormerly AirplanePro 16:39, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

TPS'ing Yes you can, but I'd recommend using the A-class process. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:40, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
At the very least youll want to go through peer review...Is there a certain article you are referring too? Maybe some of us could take a glance at it and give you some ideas. --Kumioko (talk) 16:51, 22 September 2010 (UTC)
Arado Ar E.381 WikiCopterRadioChecklistFormerly AirplanePro 19:07, 22 September 2010 (UTC)

Reminder

YOU ABSOLUTELY MUST HAVE EVERYTHING IN NO LATER THAN NOVEMBER 1. Failure to submit everything will result in your sitting out another semester. Hacket needs a list of classes I attended, Sheppard needs to be emailed so we can get his letter in, and you need to inquire of Jaime if she will still write a letter for you.

Also, consider seeing a doctor since you've been experiencing pain in you chest, shoulders and back for over a month; additionally, your new cavity gets drilled and filled on October 5. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.135.171.73 (talk) 06:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 September 2010

Coordinator

Thank-you very much Tom! It's good to be back! Cam (Chat)(Prof) 00:56, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Well done

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

Congratulations on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Ian Rose (talk) 02:13, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thank you Tom and congratulations to yourself as well! Ranger Steve (talk) 07:53, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 October 2010

Mississippi class battleship

Tom, we've worked quite a bit in an attempt to satisfy the concerns that you and others posted at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Mississippi class battleship. Do you have the time to come back and verify that we've addressed your concerns? Thanks! Kevin --Kevin Murray (talk) 01:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Ribbons

I noticed that you've authored a few award ribbon racks for some ships (such as File:USS New Jersey (BB-62) Awards and Medals.PNG). Do you have any that aren't in commons:Category:Displays of military decorations of the United States? I'd like to replace the single images with dynamic tabled racks for consistancy and ease of maintenance. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 14:42, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

OK, I took care of New Jersey, Missouri, and Wisconsin. If you have a ref for Iowa, I can do that one. I can also take care of any other ship or biography you would like. Be sure and let me know if somebody screws up the table. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 16:24, 20 October 2010 (UTC)
K, I also found a photo from NavSource. Verified against the ship history, I think that's solid enough. Let me know if you ever need any more. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 21:13, 22 October 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

Just wanted to say, thanks for the idea [1] ResMar 20:57, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Something for you

The Content Review Medal of Merit  
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period 1 April-30 September 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal.  Roger Davies talk 08:03, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/USS Yorktown collision
Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted
Your nomination for featured picture status, File:USS Yorktown collision.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Makeemlighter (talk) 01:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 11 October 2010

The Signpost: 18 October 2010

Belated thanks

The WikiProject Barnstar
In gratitude for your service as the lead coordinator of the Military History WikiProject from March to September 2010, please accept this WikiProject Barnstar. With thanks, EyeSerenetalk 14:54, 20 October 2010 (UTC)


As a device, I offer you my gratitude for being a really personable coord and some kind of a mensch in the form of the Cool Award. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 18:01, 21 October 2010 (UTC)

Mississippi class battleship

Tom, it seems that the major remaining concern is over copy edit issues. Am I interpreting this correctly? If there are deeper concerns, please let me know before I try to recruit seasoned copy editor. Thanks! --Kevin Murray (talk) 20:10, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : LV (September 2010)



The Military history WikiProject Newsletter: Issue LV (September 2010) 		Front page
Project news
Articles
Members
Editorial
Project news

The results of September's coordinator elections, plus ongoing project discussions and proposals

Articles

A recap of the month's new Featured and A-Class articles

Members

Our newest A-class medal recipients, this September's top contestants, plus the reviewers' Roll of Honour (Apr-Sep 2010)

Editorial

In the final part of our series on copyright, Moonriddengirl describes how to deal with copyright infringements on Wikipedia

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 20:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 25 October 2010


Happy TomStar81's Day!

User:TomStar81 has been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian,
and therefore, I've officially declared today as TomStar81's day!
For being such a beautiful person and great Wikipedian,
enjoy being the Star of the day, dear TomStar81!

Peace,
Rlevse
23:59, 28 October 2010 (UTC)

A record of your Day will always be kept here.

For a userbox you can add to your userbox page, see User:Rlevse/Today/Happy Me Day! and my own userpage for a sample of how to use it.

For a user ribbon you can use, see
Awesome Wikipedian
Awesome Wikipedian
— Rlevse • Talk • 23:59, 28 October 2010 (UTC)
One minute early, 29 Oct for you. — Rlevse • Talk • 00:03, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, TomStar81. You have new messages at WikiCopter's talk page.
Message added 06:18, 31 October 2010 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Iowa class battleship

The A-Class review for Iowa class battleship is now open, and any input there would be appreciated! Thanks! WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • lost • defense • attack) 01:06, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010

Orphaned non-free image File:Blue Submarine -6 Screenshot.JPG

⚠
⚠
 Thanks for uploading File:Blue Submarine -6 Screenshot.JPG. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently orphaned, meaning that it is not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

PLEASE NOTE:

  • I am a bot, and will therefore not be able to answer your questions.
  • I will remove the request for deletion if the file is used in an article once again.
  • If you receive this notice after the image is deleted, and you want to restore the image, click here to file an un-delete request.
  • To opt out of these bot messages, add {{bots|deny=DASHBot}} to your talk page.
  • If you believe the bot has made an error, please turn it off here and leave a message on my owner's talk page.


Thank you. DASHBot (talk) 05:37, 5 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010

RE:Happy Veteran's Day

Thank you tom. It is always nice to hear from the people that you consider among your best friends in Wikipedia. what have you been up to? Tony the Marine (talk) 03:17, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Award!

 The WikiChevrons 
I'm looking at the work you've done and involvement in the Military History WikiProject (and particularly US Military History task force). I'm totally amazed at the great work you have done. :) Sorry to hear that you are on wikibreak and look forward to having you back in full soon as possible. --Aude (talk) 19:04, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
PS - I want to make sure you see Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Military_history#WikiProject_FedFlix_video and Wikipedia:WikiProject FedFlix. I realize you might not have much time to help now, but think this will be an ongoing project and with ongoing help needed. We would love help, and also if you can recommend other people (especially if you know of anyone in the Washington DC area, but we also need online help) or spread the word, that would be fantastic. Cheers. --Aude (talk) 19:07, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010

Ping

Hi Tom, check your inbox. Parsecboy (talk) 13:30, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LVI, October 2010

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) 23:07, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010

Happy Thanksgiving

Happy WHAT? It sure ain't happy for me!

Happy Thanksgiving Tony the Marine (talk), 25 November 2010

Why did you delete my article?

Your a fucking faggot for doing that. Actually, Wikipedia already has an article called Cannabis Corpse. Your a fucking retard. Put it back up. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Panicpack121 (talk • contribs)

why?

why my page (Bad Panda Records) should be deleted? There are plenty of netlabels ( http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Netlabels ) and everything is in free download —Preceding unsigned comment added by Badpanda (talk • contribs) 04:26, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Salt?

You speedied BMB LU, but can you also salt that page, BMB Lee, and Banya Mu Beta to prevent recreation of the same article in those locations where it was previously created? MSJapan (talk) 18:05, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Wickes and Clemson Class destroyer classes

I thought I might work on these classes a bit given that they US Destroyer Class articles seem to be in horrible shape. I've asked Brad101 if he'd be interested and you and I have worked on a few of the same articles as well, so I thought I might ask you if you were so inclined to help out a bit.Tirronan (talk) 19:23, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Might take a look at what I am doing on the articles now, I think they are somewhat improved anyway.Tirronan (talk) 23:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010

OMT in the Signpost

"WikiProject Report" would like to focus on Operation Majestic Titan for a Signpost article to be published this month. This is an excellent opportunity to draw attention to your efforts and attract new members to the project. Would you be willing to participate in an interview? If so, here are the questions for the interview. Just add your response below each question and feel free to skip any questions that you don't feel comfortable answering. Also, if you know anyone else who would like to participate in the interview, please share this with them. Have a great day. -Mabeenot (talk) 02:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 6 December 2010

The Bugle: Issue LVII, November 2010

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) 23:28, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Waupaca Streetcar System

FYI, see User talk:LadyofShalott#Waupaca Streetcar system. LadyofShalott 19:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

This concerns your deletion of my article relating to the Waupaca Streetcar system. This was deleted before I even had chance to comment on the proposal. I am starting a project to complete the descriptions of Wisconsin Streetcar and Interurban systems which themselves are referenced in several Wikipedia Lists. I started with a small one and to have it deleted, apparently at random, is not helpful. The system itself was small, hence tha small article, others will be larger because the systems were larger. That is not the point. Every railroad line ever built in the UK is described on Wikipedia. The completeness of the project is a wonder to behold. I suppose I could go though them deleting the small ones now no longer operating on the grounds of none importance but what would be the point? So what was the point of deleting the Waupaca system? I will do no more work on streetcar systems until this is clarified.--Wickifrank (talk) 22:48, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments. The Waupaca Streetcar Company already appears (by its proper name Waupaca Electric Light and Railway Company which I used for my article) in two Wikipedia lists, List of streetcar systems in the United States and List of Wisconsin railroads. I am unclear what the benefit of starting another list would be. The lack of internet based sources is one of the reasons I have for starting these pages on various systems - what material there is being published long before the internet was thought of and at least Wikipedia is able to point those interested in the direction of their local libary. I am not sure that, in itself, that should be a reason for deletion. I have cleaned up my article into a form more commonly used for these systems and trust that it will survive further scrutiny.--Wickifrank (talk) 20:10, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

I have put this page up for deletion review as you suggested--Wickifrank (talk) 00:59, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 December 2010

Asking for a comment in a Move Page request

Hello there! There is an article called "Argentina-Brazil War", it's about an international conflict that occurred between 1825 and 1828 between the Empire of Brazil and the United Provinces of South America over the possession of the Brazilian province of Cisplatina (which had a mixed Portuguese and Spanish population). The problem is that is was never called "Argentina-Brazil War". An editor probably created this name for it.

Thus, I proposed the name to be changed for "Cisplatine War" because it is "the name which is most commonly used to refer to the subject of the article in English-language reliable sources" (WP:COMMONNAME). A few examples: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11], [12], [13], [14], [15], [16], [17], [18], [19], [20], [21], [22], [23], [24], [25], [26], [27], [28], [29], [30], [31], [32], [33], etc...

Your comment in Talk:Argentina–Brazil War#Requested move would be very welcome! Kind regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 December 2010

The Signpost: 27 December 2010

Thank you for the welcome and the links you posted to my talk page. I'm struggling a bit with certain features and appreciate the links and encouragement. I see from the messages above we have several shared areas of interest. Thanks again. Bradkay (talk) 22:43, 30 December 2010 (UTC)

Iowa class battleship is done...

...and it's good; hope to see it as an FA soon. Good luck! Wi2g 04:00, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Aw, thanks for the chevron—very kind of you! Good luck with the FA process. Wi2g 16:14, 2 January 2011 (UTC)

Iowa

Comments made at the peer review. :-) The Land (talk) 10:30, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 3 January 2011

Invitation to join WikiProject United States

Hello, TomStar81/Archive 12! WikiProject United States, an outreach effort supporting development of United States related articles in Wikipedia, has recently been restarted after a long period of inactivity. As a user who has shown an interest in United States related topics we wanted to invite you to join us in developing content relating to the United States. If you are interested please add your Username and area of interest to the members page here. Thank you!!!

--Kumioko (talk) 20:51, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

Milhist A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct–Dec 2010

The Content Review Medal of Merit  
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer and A-Class reviews for the period Oct–Dec 2010, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:20, 4 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 January 2011

Encyclopedic writing

Hi Tom. I'm trying to copyedit your Cultural significances section, and I keep running into roadblocks. I'm not sure what you are trying to say in parts, and a lot of it needs to be entirely rewritten to show who holds the opinion ("the American public" is not a good opinion, seeing as I'm sure many don't hold that opinion. "Naval historians" is good, except it'd be nice to know which historians.) Take a look at Yamato class battleship and try to reformat your section based on that, okay? Thanks, Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:32, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

Also, I would highly recommend you try these exercises. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:33, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I added some comments in-text for you, rather than at the peer review, so they are clearer to read [34] Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:38, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
I continued upward with the in-text comments, and there are a lot of problems still... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:49, 11 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 January 2011

The Bugle: Issue LVIII, December 2010



To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. Past editions may be viewed here. BrownBot (talk) 21:51, 18 January 2011 (UTC)

Nukes on BBs

I think you hit the nail on the head regarding the RS factor of Greenpeace's emails, and the journal ref only demonstrates that there were nuclear tomahawks, which was never an issue. However, we still don't have an RS confirming that the Iowas ever actually carried any of them... even though it's probable, it's not verifiable with what we currently have (we can only prove that the subs had the TLAM-N versions). However, I think you can easily get away with stating that there was a nuclear variant of the tomahawk (maybe have to snag a ref off of that article), and then state "it was alleged that the Iowas carried these nuclear versions..." and referencing the Greenpeace just to prove that there was an allegation avoids the RS issue. Simply stating that people thought there were nukes neatly avoids the OR and SYNTH issues. There is also a book which makes a vague claim of nuclear capability, but doesn't really develop that or source actual deployemnt, and while it's certainly more reliable than Greenpeace, I'm not sure it carries the same weight; it also only mentions BB-61, even though it wasn't the only one equipped with tomahawks. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:42, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

P.S. I found some forum chatter which may interest you, even if it's not even remotely suitable for a reference: [35]

AFAIK the TLAM-N could be carried by any ship that could carry Tomahawks, so it's probably best to confine mention of them to that fact.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 19:00, 20 January 2011 (UTC)

driversselect

Hi, It shows that initiated the process for the article driversselect to be deleted. I am trying to write the article for the company driversselect. I was not with the company when this happened back in July 2009, but it has come to our attention that we need to tell the story of our company. We have no intentions of promoting our business or selling our product; we just want people to have a resource for knowing about who we are. Is there any you could help with getting our article undeleted?

Britt mich (talk) 03:27, 24 January 2011 (UTC)Britt mich

the name of the page and article was driversselect and you can find our web page at wwww.driversselect.com. Even though we are an internet automotive retailer, part of my responsibilities is to educate consumers about our company. I wasn't with the company when the page, article, and account were created so I have no history of what happened or what was written. ~~Britt mich — Preceding unsigned comment added by Britt mich (talk • contribs) 01:17, 1 February 2011 (UTC)

Bloginity

Hi TomStar81, you have recently added a page I have been writing, Bloginity, to the AfD. Which I am grateful because I have been learning so much about template usage, citations, and how to make a page qualify for Wikipedia. I am still improving the page as it goes and I wanted to get your attention to it and get your honest opinion. The buzz around Bloginity has been really major, today, it has been named as one of the web's best entertainment spots. [1]. (Knox387 (talk) 18:25, 24 January 2011 (UTC)).

Responded on my talk page, thanks (Knox387 (talk) 22:55, 24 January 2011 (UTC)).
Hi TomStar81, how are you? Thanks for contributing to my first page. I really appreciate the help, guidance, etc. I was hoping you could direct me where would be a good place to start practicing on Wikipedia (whether it's editing pages, adding db spam notes, or giving my general opinion about an article). Thanks for the help! (Knox387 (talk) 15:27, 29 January 2011 (UTC)).
Good morning TomStar81, how are you doing? Long time no speak. Just thought I'd hit you up and let you know I'm progressing with Wikipedia, slowly - but well. I came across this page (and a few others) which I marked as AfD. I figured I'd use my specialty for Online Magazines / Blogs, provide a quality opinion on sites that are listed on Wikipedia. This one in particular, I found a bit disturbing.[2]. Hope all is well. Have a good one mate! (Knox387 (talk) 13:23, 17 March 2011 (UTC))

The Signpost: 24 January 2011

Comparison of armoured to unarmoured flight deck designs

You're funny! --baha 22:41, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
  1. Thanks for handling the AFD on the article. To quoth Shakespeare, "Crap by any other name smells just as rotten in Denmark." :) - BilCat (talk) 10:00, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
  2. How we should we delete thee, oh silly page? Let me count the ways: Tom, great parody, thanks for brightening up my morning. NtheP (talk) 10:07, 27 January 2011 (UTC)
  3. The essay Wikipedia:Comparison Articles and Original Research covers this. Also, if you want to add more details on why comparison articles are OR, see posts in this search. -- Uzma Gamal (talk) 12:21, 29 January 2011 (UTC)
It seems like we have some editors I've never heard of showing up to ivote Keep, other than Warden. Are you familiar with most of them? Perhaps some investigation is in order to make sure things are being done correctly here. - BilCat (talk) 20:52, 29 January 2011 (UTC)

Iowa battleship peer review

Hi, Tom, can the Iowa class battleship peer review be archived? It appears to have been open for almost six weeks now. The last post on it was about a week ago, so I think it is complete, but I just wanted to check with you first. Let me know what you want to do with it. I can archive it if you wish, or if you want to do it that is fine. Also, if you want to keep it open that should also be okay (I don't think we have any set time limit for peer reviews), but it should probably be wrapped up soon. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 22:53, 27 January 2011 (UTC)

Wikipedia Ambassador Program is looking for new Online Ambassadors

Hi! Since you've been identified as an Awesome Wikipedian, I wanted to let you know about the Wikipedia Ambassador Program, and specifically the role of Online Ambassador. We're looking for friendly Wikipedians who are good at reviewing articles and giving feedback to serve as mentors for students who are assigned to write for Wikipedia in their classes.

If that sounds like you and you're interested, I encourage you to take a look at the Online Ambassador guidelines; the "mentorship process" describes roughly what will be expected of mentors during the current term, which started in January and goes through early May. If that's something you want to do, please apply!

You can find instructions for applying at WP:ONLINE. The main things we're looking for in Online Ambassadors are friendliness, regular activity (since mentorship is a commitment that spans several months), and the ability to give detailed, substantive feedback on articles (both short new articles, and longer, more mature ones).

I hope to hear from you soon.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 01:58, 28 January 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 January 2011

DELETED ARTICLE

Well honestly i posted this article because I'm doing an english essay on someone i think will one day be famous. Like who i think would be the next Bill Gates, Oprah, or the next Michael Jackson. I always use wikipedia for my research so when i typed in City Boy and nothing came up i decided to publish this in case anyone else ever needed it. I wasn't trying to promote him which is why i didn't include his websites... but since you deleted it i was wondering if you could sent me a copy of what i wrote. [: JSTaFAN (talk) 10:19, 2 February 2011 (UTC)

Re CSD category, thanx 4 not deleting

Thanx. That crops up the first day of each month, because of a formatting faux pas on my part. It’s a little weird, re not wrapping a transcluded CSD tag in a noinclude.
See this archived Courcelles talk page entry (Inadvertent...) for the explanation.
Haven’t got it quite squared away yet. Wasn’t a problem till recently.

Schweiwikist (talk) 07:43, 3 February 2011 (UTC)

My edits to your comment

I know it is generally frowned upon to edit someone else's comment. I did so at User_talk:Nickcreevy#Blocked and mentioned it at ANI. I don't think you'll object, but I certainly want to inform you.--SPhilbrickT 13:55, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

ACRs due for closure

Hi, Tom, sorry to bother you. We seem to be having some trouble getting a couple of ACRs closed. There are currently two listed for closure at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators#ACRs for closure. I don't think that you were involved in either of them. One of them is an OMT article, so I understand that sometimes members of that project are reluctant to close those articles, but you might be able to close Japanese air attacks on the Marianas. If you get some free time, would you mind taking a look? Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 14:38, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

Thanks, Tom. AustralianRupert (talk) 21:42, 4 February 2011 (UTC)

The Party Ain't Over - Wanda Jackson

Tom, I'm not sure why [Party Ain't Over] was removed.

The info on your deletion says:

22:37, 2 February 2011 TomStar81 (talk | contribs) deleted "The Party Ain't Over" ‎ (A9: Non-notable music by artist with no Wikipedia article)

Wanda Jackson is quite notable with an extensive wiki page on herself and another on her discography.

Please reconsider your deletion decision. Thx.

Jks313 (talk) 01:17, 6 February 2011 (UTC)jks313

The Signpost: 7 February 2011

The Signpost: 14 February 2011

The Bugle: Volume LVIX, January 2011

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) 16:54, 21 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 February 2011

National Maritime Museum Collaboration

I just wanted to let you know that I am having discussions with the National Maritime Museum about them releasing a large tranche of information about Royal Navy warships to us. Your input as a Milhist coordinator would be particularly welcome at Wikipedia:GLAM/NMM. Regards, The Land (talk) 19:52, 25 February 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 28 February 2011

Battleships

Got a delivery last night (rather late for UPS, actually) that you might be interested in: [36]. The item description said it was large (1:350 scale), but you don't really think of 31 inches as that long till you hold it in your hands! I got Missouri in her 1945 configuration, and New Jersey in her 1980s refit. If I get them done before I move this summer, I'll order the Yamato and Bismarck and make a nice little battle in my living room. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 13:50, 4 March 2011 (UTC)

If I never have to paint and glue another Oerlikon 20mm gun smaller than the lead in a mechanical pencil, it'll be too soon. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 12:35, 7 March 2011 (UTC)
Question: do you know exactly what spot on the Missouri's deck the Japanese surrender was signed? I always assumed that it was on the aft deck, near the catapaults (because that's the largest open space), but looking at some of the photos, I can see bulkheads, and Perry's flag is clearly visible being hung from one. I know that the area is decked with wooden planks (vice metal) because the plaque is still there, but that's still a lot of possible square footage. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 13:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
So, on the third second deck, just behind the #2 turret and below the bridge? OK, that's where I'll paint on the plaque. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 22:09, 9 March 2011 (UTC)
K, so I thought the 20mm guns were bad, but rigging the wires and antennae is infinitely worse. The kit wants me to heat up one of the sprues and pull the plastic into a thin strand, but I haven't had much success with only two hands. I bought some fishing line and painted it, but it's too springy and wants to return to the curved shape it had wrapped around the spool. I'm so frustrated that I'm almost considering letting Iowa sail without her ensign. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 17:03, 1 April 2011 (UTC)
They're done. Yamato is on its way. bahamut0013wordsdeeds 16:26, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Improper Deletion of Sri Devananda Goudiya Math and/or Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math

It apperars that the Article Sri Devananda Goudiya Math since, nominated for speedy deletion, it was deleted because of the reason that the article was a repost of material of another article Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math that was previously deleted following a deletion debate.

Therefore, the questions arise that -

(1) What was the grounds, considered favourable, in said deletion debate, supporting deletion of the previous article Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math and correspondingly the instant article Sri Devananda Goudiya Math also?

(2) Whether, such grounds has been established as valid grounds to deleted such of an Article Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math as per Wikipedia's prevailing deletion policy?

To address these issues, let us look on the basis of which such deletion was taken effect. Accordingly, concerned deletion debate concluded the grounds as, (i) Non notable pilgrimage site (ii) have no independent reliable sources to comply with the policy on inclusion (iii) whether there was an independent article or a book written about the subject there could be a reason (iv) No third-party WP:RS to assert its notability (v) This particular Matha is not particularly notable (vi) whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source (vii) verifiability. Also see reviewers quotes below.

In short those grounds were (a) verifiability, not truth (b) independent reliable sources(c) policy on inclusion.

However, if Wikipedia's prevailing deletion policy is considered and the validity of the concerned deletion grounds need to be established, then reasonably it will rather be found that the decision in deleting the Article Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math was improper and invalid. They have not considered the following:-

(1) Valid verifiability or policy on inclusion e.g. Maharaja, Sri Srimad Bhaktivedanta Narayana (2005). Sri Navadvipa-dhama and Prominent Holy Places of the Gaudiya Vaisnavas in Sri Gauda-mandala. @ Gaudiya Vedanta Publications. p. 143-145. ISBN 81-86737-56-1.

(2) independent reliable sources e.g.

Administrators/Reviewers quotes:-

User:Wikidas said, "Non notable pilgrimage site, too small and have no independent reliable sources to comply with the policy on inclusion. Wikidas© 23:41, 7 January 2011 (UTC)".

He further said, "I guess if there was an independent article or a book written about the subject there could be a reason, or a possible reason to keep it."

User:Redtigerxyz said, "Searched the internet. Found no third-party WP:RS to assert its notability. The references in the article are not really RS. 1 mentions the temple in passing reference, the other calls it a "scared" place.-- Redtigerxyz Talk 15:11, 19 January 2011 (UTC)"

User:Wikidas further suggested me, "This particular Matha (out of hundreds) is not particularly notable. See: WP:V. "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth; that is, whether readers can check that material in Wikipedia has already been published by a reliable source." I am sure you visited this building. But there are no sources for your claims. Can you please use google books or some other source and find more sources that are published by reliable publishers? . Wikidas© 10:33, 22 January 2011 (UTC)"

The deletion was prejudiced and biased as well. A bonafide article such as Sri Devananda Gaudiya Math has been deleted by the inefficient observation of some biased administration that ultimately injuring Wikipedia.

Snthakur ( সৌমেন্দ্র নাথ ঠাকুর ) (talk) 13:16, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 7 March 2011

They say, he say, she say, me say

REF: this edit

  • Hello. Per the above WP:CPUSH statement: This is getting way out of hand, the guy's rhetoric is getting from bad to worse and all he does day after day, week after week is nothing but the insertion (or the attempt of it) of content that does not readily improve the related article pages in most ways than not. Check out his contribution history and it is very apparent what I'm saying here is verified; Talk:Chengdu J-10, Talk:Chengdu J-20 and Talk:Lockheed Martin F-35 Lightning II being pages where he goes on and on about such crap (apologies for lack of a better word to describe it). Should we have a specially formed panel of committee members for WP:AIR or WP:MILHIST to help curb such piling of nonsense that does not serve the Military section of WP as an online free-to-edit encyclopeida (which is factual and accurately written by responsible editors backed up by verified facts and figures). Or should we refer this to WP:RFCU or WP:ARBCOM instead? --Dave ♠♣♥♦™№1185©♪♫® 05:31, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Draft RFCs

Sorry about that, I should have gotten to these a while ago. I'lll get these out soon and leave you a message when it's done. Did you want to make any changes before I put them out for comment? - Hydroxonium (talk) 07:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'm thinking we may want to update the dates on the signatures, just so it doesn't confuse people. What do you think? - Hydroxonium (talk) 08:20, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

These 4 draft RfC are now official RfCs.

  1. Allow IP editors to create articles
  2. Change CSD to userspace drafts
  3. Allow socializing
  4. Welcome new users

Since they are major changes, I will put a note at WP:VPR and list them on WP:CENT, but I will wait unitl I get your input about the dates and any possible changes. - Hydroxonium (talk) 10:05, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

I'd like to start advertising these. Please see discussion with Yoenit below. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (talk) 06:55, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

Draft RfC for talk page templates

There was some concern from Yoenit about the summary on Draft RfC:Minimize talk page templates. It didn't really get resolved, so I haven't moved forward on this yet. I will ask Yoenit to stop by to see how you two want to handle this. Thanks. - Hydroxonium (talk) 10:20, 11 March 2011 (UTC)

Hi Tom, I stand by my comments on the Draft RFC. I can turn them into a proper opposing view, but I am interested in your reaction to them first. Yoenit (talk) 11:54, 11 March 2011 (UTC)
Hi Yoenit. I was hoping for input from TomStar81, but these RfCs are starting to generate input faster than I thought they would. I would like to keep the interest of the community while we have it, so I would like to move this RfC forward. Would you mind converting your input in to an opposing view, or would you mind me doing it, as opposed to waiting? Thanks. - Hydroxonium (talk) 07:03, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

I went back and re-read all the relevent threads and think we're all on the same page. Here is a new suggestion for a Summary.

When dealing with new users, we should discourage excessive templating and encourage more personal messages.

Is everybody OK with this? Thanks. - Hydroxonium (talk) 07:34, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

That works for me. I am looking forward to seeing what develops, though I doubt very much that the rfc will change anything here it'll be interesting to see the input we get from those who reply. TomStar81 (Talk) 11:18, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
Thanks. I have changed the Summary, but left Yoenit's comments. I don't think its proper for me to remove the comments without getting the OK from Yoenit first. - Hydroxonium (talk) 11:37, 12 March 2011 (UTC)
The RfCs are starting to generate some interest from the community and I'd like to keep it going. So I'm going to take a chance that Yoenit will be by soon and update the RfC. Therefore I'm adding an RfC tag to this one and going to list these at WP:VPP and WP:CENT in order to keep up the interest from the community. - Hydroxonium (talk) 14:44, 12 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 14 March 2011

Notification: changes to "Mark my edits as minor by default" preference

Hello there. This is an automated message to tell you about the gradual phasing out of the preference entitled "Mark all edits minor by default", which you currently have (or very recently had) enabled.

On 13 March 2011, this preference was hidden from the user preferences screen as part of efforts to prevent its accidental misuse (consensus discussion, guidelines for use at WP:MINOR). This had the effect of locking users in to their existing preference, which, in your case, was true. To complete the process, your preference will automatically be changed to false in the next few days. This does not require any intervention on your part and all users will still be able to manually mark their edits as being minor in the usual way.

For well-established users such as yourself there is a workaround available involving custom JavaScript. If you have any problems, feel free to drop me a note.

Thank you for your understanding and happy editing :) Editing on behalf of User:Jarry1250, LivingBot (talk) 20:22, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

I'll have you know that I am not happy about this. How exactly am I suppose to filter my watchlist results if the the minor edit by default option is removed? Do honestly expect people are going to waste time looking for the button so they can check it before saving? And why on earth is there no option to keep those this preference in place for those who had it in place before the decision was made to revoke it? Its nice that the javascript option is being made available, but for how long, and at what cost? I know nothing about this system beyond the fact that I am suppose to take responsibility for whatever edits are made with the thing on, so what assurances do I have that adding the code to my java page will not come back to bite me in the ass? TomStar81 (Talk) 07:17, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
Tom, you were supposed to take responsibility for any 'minor' edits made when the thing was enabled... not much different now. Most people look for the box before saving; the great majority of editors did not use the feature. The JavaScript option won't do anything more than automatically check the box for you, and it'll last forever because it's manipulating Mediawiki itself (sort of like Twinkle, Friendly, etc. but a lot more minor). Calm down. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:47, 16 March 2011 (UTC)
What Ed said :) In short, this is neither de jure nor de facto removing the "minor" edit. In fact, the whole purpose is to improve the correlation between minor-in-name and minor-in-nature, thus making your watchlist notices for, not less, useful. Only about 6500 active users had it enabled, which is a small fraction of the community and hence a small number of minor edits. And as Ed says, the Javascript option will be available for you ad infinitum (unless you got blocked or something stupid like that). If you have any more questions, you can post them on my talk page or here and drop me a TB. Regards, - Jarry1250 [Who? Discuss.] 17:59, 16 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011

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) 22:54, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

IP articles and admins

Hi Tom, I've put a query at Wikipedia_talk:Wiki_Guides/Allow_IP_editors_to_create_articles#Many_more_admins? that you might want to read. ϢereSpielChequers 22:06, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 21 March 2011

The Signpost: 28 March 2011

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Jan-Mar 2011

The Content Review Medal of Merit  
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted work on the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period January–March 2011, I am delighted to award you this Content Review Medal. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:06, 3 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 4 April 2011

The Signpost: 11 April 2011

97.77.109.226 (talk) 04:02, 19 April 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 18 April 2011



  1. ^ http://www.allmyfaves.com/blog/photos/bloginity-one-of-the-webs-best-entertainment-spots/
  2. ^ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Celebrity_Cafe
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:TomStar81/Archive_12&oldid=1242052920"