Jump to content

User talk:Ian Rose/Archive Jan-Jun 2018

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

October to December 2017 Milhist article reviewing

[edit]
 Military history reviewers' award 
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of six Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period October to December 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:07, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Thanks PM! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:14, 3 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLI, January 2018

[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) 13:15, 8 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Sydney meetup

[edit]

Short notice but there will be a meetup in Sydney on the 13 January 2018 at 6:30pm, still looking for a venue and open to suggestions. I hope you're able to make it but understand that this is very short notice. Bidgee (talk) 20:41, 10 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Air Board (Australia)

[edit]

On 13 January 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Air Board (Australia), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Australian Air Board (inaugural members pictured) chose 31 March rather than 1 April as the founding date of the Royal Australian Air Force to avoid being called "April Fools"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Air Board (Australia). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Air Board (Australia)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 12:02, 13 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bat FAC

[edit]

Hello, its been over a week since the last review and support. The article currently has four supports and reviews have covered everything from sourcing to images to the text. Is there anything else needed? LittleJerry (talk) 20:24, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your civility

[edit]

In the reversion of my Kubrick edit. It was appreciated. --Volvlogia (talk) 20:44, 24 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about FAC

[edit]

Hello! I apologize for intruding on your talk page, but I was wondering if you could provide a status update on my current FAC (Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/3 of Hearts (album)/archive1)? I believe that it is ready for promotion as it has received feedback from other users and had an image review and source review. Hope you are having a wonderful week so far! Aoba47 (talk) 20:06, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aoba47, sorry, I did mean to respond to your query at WT:FAC yesterday when I was actioning another FAC request -- I haven't gone closely into the status but at first glance it looks reasonably close to promotion so would have no issue if you'd like to nominate another now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:56, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • Thank you for the response! I always bad for messaging you as I bet you are juggling a lot of work both on here and in real life so I do not mean to be an inconvenience. Hope you are doing well. Aoba47 (talk) 23:41, 25 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize for interrupting again, but I was just wondering if there was any movement on this as a little over a week has passed since I initially put up my request for a status update. Aoba47 (talk) 01:31, 29 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bugle

[edit]

Hi Ian, I think that the February Bugle is now done aside from the updates on featured content :) Nick-D (talk) 07:29, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Nick, aiming to get to it this evening. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:08, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Ugh, busy day/night, have to postpone 24hrs... :-( Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:14, 8 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

FAC Margaret

[edit]

Hey, sorry to bother you here. My FAC Margaret (singer) received 10 supports, the image review has been carried out and the sources review is complete. I think it is ready for promotion. Do you think you could look into it? Hope you have a good weekend. Best wishes. ArturSik (talk) 11:12, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Replied at nom. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:02, 10 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

No. 1 Flying Training School RAAF

[edit]

Hi Ian, It looks like the RAAF has recently replaced its website (no doubt breaking all our links...). I just noticed that the structure page lists No. 1 Flying Training School RAAF as being an active part of the Air Training Wing. I can't find any sources on this, but presumably it's been re-raised as part of the Australian Defence Force Basic Flying Training School moving to Victoria? (and is probably that school under a new name?). Regards, Nick-D (talk) 00:54, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Nick, I think I saw this in an issue of Air Force News last year but if I remember rightly it was the new name for a totally different school, and the report made no connection with the old 1FTS, so I left our 1FTS article as is pending further info. I'll try and take another look soon (after I do the FA blurbs for the Bugle and despatch!)... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:00, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
From a quick search, the 25 February 2016 edition says that the School of Air Warfare was renamed No. 1 Flying Training School that month. There's also some coverage in later issues. Nick-D (talk) 01:18, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, that's the one I saw (time flies!), and I've checked the later ones and again no mention of the earlier incarnation. I don't think we can say that the 1FTS we discuss in our current article has been re-formed as such, because there's no connection between the old 1FTS and the SAW, or with the SAN, as SAW was called formerly. I'd like to see the crest of the new 1FTS, if it has one, that would tell us something... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:24, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, the wording is all very vague. It might be worth noting that the name at least lives on? On a different subject, I've also noticed that the Williams Foundation has posted the first three of interesting series of articles which were published in Australian Aviation on the history of the RAAF's higher organisation - there's links to them here. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 03:28, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLII, February 2018

[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) 07:16, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Australian Air Corps

[edit]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Australian Air Corps you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:01, 11 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

And another

[edit]

Polk not having generated any comments in some time, and likely ripe for promotion, would you mind if I nominated the next one?--Wehwalt (talk) 17:22, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Also, I've scheduled Henry Wrigley as TFA for March 7, 2018. You know the drill.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:00, 12 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm, I was going to say that after contributing or co-contributing 36 articles to TFA over the years I'm finally starting to get a bit jack of working through the inevitable changes that arise, well-intentioned as many are... Are you really desperate for another Australian military one...?! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:18, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Regardless of your response re. Wrigley, no issue with you nominating another FAC given Polk's progress. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:42, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I'd really appreciate it it you let Wrigley run. It's in place of one where the nominator objected, you see. Thanks on Polk.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:57, 13 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
  • I noticed that there were some cs1 maintenance tags - I think someone had fiddled with the cite book template at some point causing it to not like having (ed.) in the author/first/last name parameters - so I tweaked some of them; please revert if I've made a mess of it. I didn't do anything with the Stephens/O'Loghlin entry under 'Further reading', which is showing the same error, as I wasn't sure if they are also authors? And (sorry) IaBot has marked the present ref #55 in the Notes section as a permanent dead link but it's the same as the Helson link in the References which does seem to work - I didn't like to fiddle with that in case I messed it up, so perhaps you could have a look when you get the chance? SagaciousPhil - Chat 17:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Your GA nomination of Australian Air Corps

[edit]

The article Australian Air Corps you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Australian Air Corps 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:41, 18 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Many edits at 2001

[edit]

Recently, I noticed your many edits at the film for 2001, and couldn't help noticing the Kubrick quotation on your user page. For the past 2-3 weeks, I've been thinking of moving the main article for 2001 towards featured article and was wondering if you might be interested. Do you have any interest in possibly joining in and moving this article forward? JohnWickTwo (talk) 05:06, 20 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

desperately needs attention for external validation!

[edit]

stop deleting my edits dude I am only doing it for a class grade I need the edit to get a good grade if you don't like it leave it up for a week and delete it then I don't care geesh you are too serious about wiki edits — Preceding unsigned comment added by Athsquare (talk • contribs) 23:19, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(by talk reader) @Ian (Wiki Ed): I think this student needs your help. Chris Troutman (talk) 23:24, 24 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

177th Fighter Aviation Regiment ACR

[edit]

G'day, Ian, sorry to bother you. If you get a chance, could you please take another look at this ACR: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/177th Fighter Aviation Regiment PVO? It looks like PM pinged you, but you may have missed it or it may not have worked. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk)

I hope I'm not hassling you, but would you mind looking to see if Kges1901's latest comment satisfies your concerns about Seidov? I think that's the only thing holding up promotion at this point. Parsecboy (talk) 18:40, 9 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi guys, tks for being so patient, I did get close to completing my re-review during the week but kept getting waylaid before finishing -- will have another go now. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:01, 10 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLIII, March 2018

[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) 10:36, 12 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Australian Air Corps

[edit]

On 16 March 2018, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Australian Air Corps, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Australian Air Corps has been described as "Australia's first independent air force, albeit an interim one"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Australian Air Corps. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Australian Air Corps), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:02, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations from the Military History Project

[edit]
 The Military history A-Class medal with diamonds 
On behalf of the Military History Project, I am proud to present the A-Class medal with Diamonds for Air Board (Australia), Peter Drummond (RAF officer)‎, and Australian Air Corps MilHistBot (talk) 20:38, 16 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Margarita With A Straw

[edit]

Hey, Ian. I am not sure if you have been able to revisit the FAC, but I've resolved all of Mike's comments. Could you take a look? Thank you. VedantTalk 16:29, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Will try and do so today. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 21:02, 25 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Dealt (belatedly). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:27, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

April 2018 Milhist Backlog Drive

[edit]

G'day all, please be advised that throughout April 2018 the Military history Wikiproject is running its annual backlog elimination drive. This will focus on several key areas:

  • tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
  • adding or improving listed resources on Milhist's task force pages
  • updating the open tasks template on Milhist's task force pages
  • creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the scope of military history will be considered eligible. This year, the Military history project would like to extend a specific welcome to members of Wikipedia:WikiProject Women in Red, and we would like to encourage all participants to consider working on helping to improve our coverage of women in the military. This is not the sole focus of the edit-a-thon, though, and there are aspects that hopefully will appeal to pretty much everyone.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 April and runs until 23:59 UTC on 30 April 2018. Those interested in participating can sign up here.

For the Milhist co-ordinators, AustralianRupert and MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 10:53, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Mass message

[edit]

I can see that the last mass message had an error message as the edit comment. You may wish to fix that, or ask about it at meta. Thanks --Fæ (talk) 11:12, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Signpost interview

[edit]

MHIST is being featured again. You are welcome to respond here. Eddie891 Talk Work 22:36, 30 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Carolwood Pacific Railroad FAC

[edit]

The Carolwood Pacific Railroad FAC is ready for your final review. Sarastro was the coordinator for this one at first, but he switched roles and became a reviewer to complete the review, and he has since supported it. Unless you see anything that he missed, I believe this review is complete and ready to go. Jackdude101 talk cont 00:30, 31 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Dealt. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:21, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WestJet Encore FAC

[edit]

I am a first time nominator for FAC WestJet Encore. It is now under "older nominations". Is there anything more that I need to do? So far, there are several reviewers that have left comments. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:20, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't mind leaving this open a bit longer to see if we can't get at least one more comprehensive review -- it's been open three weeks and that's not excessive -- in any case I think we still need an image licensing review (you can post a request at the top of WT:FAC for that). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:25, 3 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I wasn't trying to nag. I am merely a FA newbie. As far as images, they are all free use, no fair use ones. Fair use might be allowed but I wanted to see if free use only could be done. Thank you for your comments. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:32, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Heh, you're not nagging, I've been pretty busy in RL and haven't been able to keep quite as close an eye on things as I'd like recently but that's slowly improving. I'm always glad when new people give FAC a try and hope they find it a good experience. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:43, 4 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
There's been some progress! Image review and a very detailed additional reviewer. Vanguard10 (talk) 02:37, 17 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for editing and promoting the article to FA. I feel that I can now make small edits to it because before I didn't want to touch it while it was being considered, unless absolutely necessary. The FAC process also has taught me how to edit better after I followed some advice made in the FAC reviews. Vanguard10 (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's really good to hear. Actually I think that one of the most important lessons to be learnt in FAC (or any WP assessment process) is to try to keep revisions to the minimum and as much as possible only in direct response to reviewer suggestions -- something along the lines of no. 3 in Robert Heinlein's Rules of Writing: "You must refrain from rewriting, except to editorial order". ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The Editor's Barnstar
Bestowed to Ian Rose for efforts in the FAC process, helping make Wikipedia better. Thank you for your service. Vanguard10 (talk) 17:54, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you -- it's great to be part of the coord team. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:36, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Bugle

[edit]

Hi Ian, I'm finished editing the Bugle for this month. When you're happy with it, I think it's good to go. Regards, Nick-D (talk) 04:22, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLIIV, April 2018

[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) 09:55, 8 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Select Survey Invite

[edit]

I'm working on a study of political motivations and how they affect editing. I'd like to ask you to take a survey. The survey should take no more than 1-2 minutes. Your survey responses will be kept private. Our project is documented at https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Research:Wikipedia_%2B_Politics.

Your survey Link: http://uchicago.co1.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_9S3JByWf57fXEkR?Q_DL=56np5HpEZWkMlr7_9S3JByWf57fXEkR_MLRP_cOc03qrmdKtc8Dz&Q_CHL=gl

I am asking you to participate in this study because you are a frequent editor of pages on Wikipedia that are of political interest. We would like to learn about your experiences in dealing with editors of different political orientations.

Sincere thanks for your help! Porteclefs (talk) 12:40, 13 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question regarding FA archive on David Meade (author)

[edit]

Does this mean that it closed as a "did not pass" for FA? I still have a chance to improve the article. --LovelyGirl7 talk

Sorry for belated response LG, yes archiving effectively means that it did not pass assessment this time; as I think I mentioned in my closing comment you're welcome to re-nominate after a minimum of two weeks from the closure (though I think the suggested improvements, and my recommendation for a de facto peer review after that, might take longer anyway). Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:06, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

WP:Featured article candidates#John de Mowbray, 3rd Duke of Norfolk

[edit]

What say you, Ian Rose? We seem to have ground to a halt somewhat; I've pinged people, but obviously can't keep doing that (It might annoy them!). Cheers! —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 08:27, 19 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, it's been quite a while now, I've tried another knowledgeable reviewer, if no joy I'll just go ahead and make the prose pass I'd planned earlier. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:56, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I see, nice one—would you, though, then have to recuse as a coordinator, d'you think? —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 08:19, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Depending on the depth of the copyedit, yes. I often make a few tweaks to articles before I promote them but if I do serious copyediting -- and especially of course if I feel I should oppose or support -- then I recuse. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:06, 21 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Question about Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/All Money Is Legal/archive1

[edit]

Hello again! I apologize for the intrusion, but I was wondering if the FAC had enough comments to be promoted as a featured article? Thank you for your help. Aoba47 (talk) 05:28, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

January to March 2018 Milhist article reviewing

[edit]
 Content Review Medal of Merit (Military history) 
On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of 8 Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period January to March 2018. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. AustralianRupert (talk) 08:13, 20 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Keep track of upcoming reviews. Just copy and paste {{WPMILHIST Review alerts}} to your user space

Ford Piquette Avenue Plant FAC

[edit]

When you have a moment, this article's FA nomination is ready for your review here: Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ford Piquette Avenue Plant/archive1. Jackdude101 talk cont 01:11, 26 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, tks. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:13, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, Ian Rose, I didn't realise we were allowed to hurry you along on your own talk page  :) —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 14:16, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Featured Article work: Appreciation

[edit]

Dear Ian, just a note of appreciation for all your hard and skillful work at FAC and in the Featured Article process. It is an important part of what makes Wikipedia such a wonderful resource for so many people around the world. Thank you! -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:01, 29 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Very kind -- thank you too for your continued participation in the process. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:22, 1 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Blamey

[edit]

I wondered how long it would take before it was reverted. (Answer: 15 minutes) ;-) Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 10:07, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Heh, would been quicker but I spent a few minutes checking if the other changes made much difference either way (didn't look like it)... ;-) Hope you and yours are keeping well. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:09, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
LOL! Yes, I did much the same. At first I didn't spot any difference, but now I see the second row doesn't line up, (whereas in the IP's version it does). I might look again.
My youngest graduated last month. (First time I've worn a suit and tie for a while! We seem to be past the weddings, and fortunately the funerals don't seem to have started yet.) Pdfpdf (talk) 11:49, 2 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Tks for your changes. Congrats re. the graduation, and let's hope the funerals are a long time coming... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:39, 4 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

A Class Cross

[edit]

The existing award is very nice and I'm keeping it. The Bot will run tomorrow morning. It won't be bothered by the existence of an award on the page, so there is no need to remove it. This will be a good test of the Bot. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 08:42, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That all works for me -- it's a fantastic achievement and you should have the award any way you choose...! Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:14, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
The MilHistBot had four pages to update, and had trouble with Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Awards/ACC. This has now been rectified. (I also changed the text from "has not yet been awarded" to "has been awarded to the following editors".) As the higher awards accrue, we'll need to add place holders for them. Hawkeye7 (discuss) 03:40, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLIV, May 2018

[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) 15:00, 12 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Monterey Bay Aquarium

[edit]

That FAC is turning into a bit of a marathon and I don't have the energy to stick with it. Is it ok to bail out or am I obligated to stick with it? Basically my sense is that it's not quite there but I'm on the fence about whether the work can be done while at FAC or to archive, get the work done, and then bring it back. Victoriaearle (tk) 17:21, 13 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Victoria, sorry for belated response -- pls don't feel obligated, you've put a lot of effort into the review and it shouldn't have had to go on this long. Some time tonight I (or perhaps Andy if he has time sooner) will try and have look and determine whether to archive or not. cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:54, 14 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]
No worries about belated replies - I'm not here that much these days. I noticed you archived it, so I'll leave a message on the article talk page. Happy to keep working there (it's an interesting place), but not in the confines of FAC. Victoriaearle (tk) 12:14, 20 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Talkback

[edit]
Hello, Ian Rose. You have new messages at Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/XVIII Tranche Project Audit/Academy.
Message added 16:33, 19 May 2018 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

As you've written highest number of the FAs than any other editor from the Military history project, and you're the coordinator of the FAC process and also the project, kindly review the three pages related to FAs, as part of the ongoing audit. They are – Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Writing Featured Articles, Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Initiating a featured article review and Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Academy/Today's Featured Article requests Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk • mail) 16:33, 19 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

My FAC nomination of Jill Valentine

[edit]

Hi. I nominated Jill Valentine for FAC nearly 48 hours ago, but the nomination still hasn't appeared at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates. It's only my third nomination, so I'm sure it's me who did something wrong. Do you know how to fix it? Cheers. Homeostasis07 (talk) 23:12, 23 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah you did everything right except transclude the nom page to top of WP:FAC -- this is a manual operation and the last part of the nom process. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 01:23, 24 May 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The Bugle: Issue CXLVI, June 2018

[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) 10:35, 11 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Kreuzstab

[edit]

I understand you, but did you see that Victoria is ill and apologized? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:32, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Gerda, I didn't see that particular exchange but I was aware Victoria is ill based on her comment at another FAC; hers was not the only extant oppose though so I feel I have to stand by my closing note. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:05, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I said that I understand. I'm not going to nominate that article again anytime soon, and if I do (but I hope you noticed my comment that we never know how much more time we'll be given), I'll ask you for a review. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:30, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
I think this was a good decision because it's best to get the work done outside of FAC. I'm willing to continue with Gerda (I'm hooked now), but my time is extremely unreliable so it's best to do it slowly on the talk page. Victoriaearle (tk) 16:06, 12 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Peter Jeffrey (RAAF officer) scheduled for TFA

[edit]

This is to let you know that the Peter Jeffrey (RAAF officer) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for July 6, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/July 6, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:01, 13 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

New Page Patrol?

[edit]

Hi Ian Rose,

I've recently been looking for editors to invite to join New Page Patrol, and from your editing history, I think you would be a good candidate. Reviewing/patrolling a page doesn't take much time but it requires a good understanding of Wikipedia policies and guidelines; we could use some additional help from an experienced user like yourself. It would be good to have an editor with your background on military topics on call as a reviewer for when pages come up in your area of expertise (that list of articles on your user page is impressive, well done).

Would you please consider becoming a New Page Reviewer? (After gaining the flag, patrolling is not mandatory. One can do it at their convenience). But kindly read the tutorial before making your decision. If you choose to apply, you can drop an application over at WP:PERM/NPR.

Cheers, and hope to see you around, — Insertcleverphrasehere (or here) 13:03, 16 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

(talk page watcher) Since the NPR is about the only permission short of WP:FOUNDER that Ian Rose doesn't have, I imagine they would have asked for it by now had they wanted it...Anyway, as one of only 2.5 FAC coordinators, I don't think we can afford to let him out of there  :) —SerialNumber54129 paranoia /cheap sh*t room 13:20, 16 June 2018 (UTC) [reply]


Nomination template problems

[edit]

Hello Ian Rose. I just attempted to nominate the George Washington article for FA but some how have messed things up.

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/George Washington/archive3

When I attempted to fix a red link things just got worse. Could you look into it and see where the 'money wrench' is? It would be gretaly appreciated. Best, Gwillhickers (talk) 20:16, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]


Update : Evidently I was able to resolve the problem, which turned out to be 'simple math'. Anyway, all the best, once again, -- Gwillhickers (talk) 20:52, 20 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Status update for FAC

[edit]

Hello! I hope that you are having a great week so far. I was wondering if I could have a status update for my current FAC. It has already received an image review and a fair amount fo commentary. I believe that it is ready for promotion. Aoba47 (talk) 00:46, 28 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Aoba, I'm hoping to walk through the list this weekend. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:35, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Black Friday (1910)

[edit]

Same question as I had about an earlier FAC - am I obligated to continue and continue and continue or may I be done? I'm beyond not having energy and at some point it feels abusive. Victoriaearle (tk) 21:41, 29 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Victoria, I don't think anyone's health or RL in general should ever be compromised by their work here. Important as many of us consider WP, it's not worth that. I and the other coords will do our best to give appropriate weight to all reviews that offer actionable criticism regardless of how 'complete' those reviews are. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:42, 30 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Ian_Rose/Archive_Jan-Jun_2018&oldid=1090442940"