User:The ed17/Archives/27

Milhist editorial
There unfortunately needed to be a correction to the editorial we worked on. I got the news today that I didn't make the final cut for the grad program this year. I was on the recommendation list from the History Department, but there weren't enough spots allocated by the Graduate Department to allow me to attend in the fall, unless by some act of God the people ahead of me all decide to go elsewhere. Regardless, I'm going to apply again next year, by which time I'll have graduated and completed my honors thesis, which will put me in a much stronger position than I am now. Just wanted to explain my change. Parsecboy (talk) 23:59, 31 March 2010 (UTC)
 * Wow, I totally missed this earlier. Dude, that SUCKS. You'll get in by next year though, especially if you have graduated by then; seniority rules. Good luck. I'm really sorry to hear that.  (natit citsejam • klat)   dE— 05:19, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Best of luck on the Honours Thesis! I have to write one in three years as well. Excellent editorial gentlemen, and I couldn't agree more! My wiki-experience is part of the reason I'm sitting at a 95% in Higher Level History at the moment. Once you've gone through the FAC process, essay-work is easy by comparison. Cam (Chat) 05:42, 1 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks :-) Agreed. I find essays to be like eating cake now. It's really easy.  (natit citsejam • klat)   dE— 16:38, 1 April 2010 (UTC)

Gothic Battleships
Hello Ed17, not very familiar with this computer communication; regards to that HMS Dreadnaught launching date, etc., you liked "the sense of an ending date..." True, with this being the 21st century, the 20th century does (now) have a ring to it; a possible "romance" to it, if you will, and it will continue to grow as more time passes. However, "that romantic" era...yet to completely evolve, does have a definite start and ending date; namely the "Gothic" appearing pre-dreadnaughts which are generally categorized from roughly 1873 (Russian Battleship vs Japanese Battleship by Forczyk, p.11) up to 1905. When Dreadnaught was launched in 1906, historians generally agreed to begin the Dreadnaught era with that year, and ironically, although sounding Gothic (Dreadnaught), the new HMS Dreadnaught design was the beginning of the conventional modern look for battleships up through the Iowa class. That ancient sci-fi look of the tumblehome hulled pre-dreadnaughts was gone (missing from the modern looking vessels). Secondly, both Britain & Germany were awaiting the results of the Russo-Japanese War, so they could "get to work!" (on building their new battleships). In October 1905 Britain began her construction. By 1906 they were finished with her, and the new race was on. Therein lies the reason for the date...the race leading up to WWI started in 1906. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.10.75.150 (talk) 05:55, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hello! You appear to be doing just fine with this computer communication. :-) What I meant by "the sense of an end date" was that "early 20th century" means (to me, at least...) that it also ended in that time frame, ie didn't continue unabated until WWII. I'm not saying 1906 is a bad date to use, just saying that it only gives a sense of when it began and not when it ended. Kind regards, — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:25, 3 April 2010 (UTC)


 * I changed it a third time, to late 19th century, since the Anglo-German naval rivalry had gotten going in earnest with Tirpitz's appointment in 1897, by which time Germany had built or was building 9 ocean-going battleships. And by the close of the century, Germany had another 10 building or in the planning stages. Parsecboy (talk) 19:53, 3 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Parsec, I didn't know that offhand (should have taken a peek at Breyer!) What do you guys think of this? — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  00:52, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Maybe "exacerbated by the commissioning of Dreadnought in 1906" would be better? Otherwise looks good to me. Parsecboy (talk) 01:01, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Done (sort of). There's a discussion on the talk page about it, too, if you wanted to join. — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  18:59, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

WkikiCup submissions
I gotta laugh; I was taken completely off-guard by the diligence of the GAR drive in passing all of my GA noms. I was already pretty sure that I would make it to the next round with only one or two more approved and I just kept the queue loaded up for the typical one or two month wait for a review so I'd get the points in the next round. But now all of my articles have either been passed or are under review so I'm gonna get a boatload of points when I really don't need or even want them! It's really not a big deal as I have plenty of B-class articles that I can clean up and submit for the next round, but it's not really the way that I'd planned to do things. Well, gang aft agley, as Burns put it.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:06, 4 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ah, you're screwed then. ;) Thanks for all your work Sturm; I love reading your articles. — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:00, 4 April 2010 (UTC)

Closing A Class Reviews
I can't find how to close A Class Reviews. Can you link me to applicable information or tell me general policy? NativeForeigner Talk/Contribs/Vote! 00:11, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Go to WP:MHR and scroll down to the "closing and archiving" header. :) — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  00:14, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of North Carolina hurricanes (2000–present)/archive2
I made a comment there which Juliancolton disagrees with, could you reply there so we can achieve consensus?  Jujutacular  T · C 01:47, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Polar Chief
My opinion was that the decision had already been taken to convert her before Audacious had been lost. Mjroots (talk) 04:40, 5 April 2010 (UTC)
 * K, just wondering. :-) — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  04:58, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Re:Cbrown
Was waiting for the contest section to be filled in, haven't been on a few days owing to work backup here. I'll fire off an email this evening and we will get this out to the adoring masses :) TomStar81 (Talk) 00:16, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Gotcha, sounds good :) — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  03:43, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Royal Navy
Thanks for fixing the vandalism to Royal Navy. David Biddulph (talk) 07:04, 6 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, thank Bil as well for his notification on WT:MILHIST. :-) — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  07:05, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

1966 Soviet submarine global circumnavigation
ed17: When I created 1966 Soviet submarine global circumnavigation, I posted it for consideration at TDYK on March 26th. First, on April 5th, Calmer Waters claims that my "hook" is not in the article, which is ridiculous but I when ahead and changed it. Then, starting on April 6th, Materialscientist have been repeatedly challenged me regarding the reliability and accuracy of this article. Every time I think have addressed the issues that he raised, he comes up with another objection. This is becoming increasingly tedious and irritating. I do not what to escalate this near-flameout situation, but I want this resolved. I have apprised TomStar81 about this. Marcd30319 (talk) 01:34, 8 April 2010 (UTC)
 * ed17: I have not seen any movement on the DYK for this article since April 8th.  Where does it stand? Thnaks! Marcd30319 (talk) 20:26, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 5 April 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 03:41, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : XLIX (March 2010)
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:21, 7 April 2010 (UTC)

FAR

 * It's my pleasure. Thanks for poking me enough so that I got involved in the first place! :-) — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:59, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Well there've been a few objections of encyclopedias being used on FAs at FARs just in the last week. DANFS is a teritary source/encyclopedia equivalent isn't it, albeit called a "dictionary"  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  02:41, 10 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Hmmmm, you've got a point, but DANFS is at least focused on a specific topic, whereas Banglapedia is focused on all of Bangladesh, with a variety of topics. — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  22:31, 10 April 2010 (UTC)

Battleship Retvizan
Left another note on another page, in case that doesn't work, one's being left here also. Regards to the damage inflicted on Retvizan, agreed; she was damaged twice, once at Port Arthur & once at the Yellow Sea. But had difficulty deciphering the original writer's work. Thank you very much for putting those two naval engagement paragraphs into chronological order, if that was you who did it, didn't know how to correct them. Other than re-typing those whole two sections. Thanks again.

User:Wexlax20 Peer Review Request/HELP!
Hello Ed! You had written on my user page when I was new to Wikipedia. I was wondering if you could look over an article I have been working on for a class taught by User:Auntieruth55. The article is Shortwave listening and I think that it is coming along well but I am having touble with the formatting of the reference I added. If you could peer review the entire article for us that would be MUCH appreciated. Thank you so much. Wexlax20 (talk) 23:41, 8 April 2010 (UTC)

Admin help?
Since you were explicitly mentioned in this message on my talk page which was in response to a block I placed on the user block notice, would you mind deciphering this and decide if I was too quick on the block button? -MBK004 20:30, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've commented — Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  21:12, 11 April 2010 (UTC)

Continued edit warring and no discussion
Aside from the intro which has been settled, could you take a look at my other changes to battlecruiser? I knew that I didn't have concensus at North Carolina class battleship and so I followed the discussion. However assuming that you didn't seriously disagree with most of my additions to battlecruiser, User:Wiki-Ed didn't have concensus for the wholesale revert. GoldDragon (talk) 22:48, 11 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I only see changes to the intro/lead? —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  01:21, 12 April 2010 (UTC)

Milhist image Dept
Hi Ed, I was thinking along the lines of the request for copyedit department, but for maps & images. I pick up quite a few poor / lacking images in FACs and it would be good to be able to send authors to somewhere more personal and useful than the graphics lab. Graphics lab frequently just does touch-up / crop / convert to SVG, rather than real image generation. I'd love to see requests for copyedit and images on the "Military history WikiProject announcements and open tasks". I think people would be more inclined to contribute real content. Cheers Doug (talk) 12:54, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the reply, I'll look at this more in-depth tomorrow. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm going to post this on WT:MHCOORD to get more input. It seems reasonable; the only problem may be that not many will volunteer to make these maps. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  21:03, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured list candidates/List of North Carolina hurricanes (2000–present)/archive2
Hi there; when you get the chance can you revisit the above FLC? Thanks, Dabomb87 (talk) 20:50, 12 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I have done so, thanks for the note —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Various FARs...
Hi Ed! There are a few FARCs that could use your opinion:


 * Featured article review/Shahbag/archive1 - The main editor here doesn't seem to understand that a large remaining issue is the lack of references, and high-quality reliable sources. Would you be able to give a more detailed listing of issues (I know you already kind of did this in your nominating statement, but it would be appreciated to re-do it, with perhaps even more specificity).
 * Featured article review/Harry S. Truman/archive1 - Is most likely an easy keep, but needs some eyes.
 * Featured article review/Mendip Hills/archive1 - The editors appear to have done another round of work on your comments.
 * Featured article review/Canada/archive1 - Still needs further comment

Thanks in advance! Dana boomer (talk) 01:44, 13 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll get to these tomorrow, Dana. Sorry for the late reply, school is getting more hectic with the end of the semester approaching. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:44, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * And you can nom a few more easy FARs for us to close  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  06:14, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

I'm not sure Truman is an easy keep actually, the balance of content seems pretty unusual  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  06:56, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I've commented on Canada and I'm leaning to delist over content issues, Shahbag was closed, planning on getting to the others either ow or in a couple hours. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  17:20, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Editors on both Mendip Hills and Canada have responded to your comments, if you want to check in further... Thanks! Dana boomer (talk) 23:38, 19 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry Dana, I feel like a dick for making you come and poke me so much. I'll try to check back with them tomorrow, but no guarantees&mdash;the combination of the week before finals and me being a chronic procrastinator means that last week and this week have been/are ridiculously busy. :\ —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Heh, no problem, as long as you don't mind the constant pokes :) I had completely forgotten that it's getting near exam time for college students, being out of college for a couple of years means that their schedule no longer runs my life! Good luck on your end-of-semester papers and tests, and I completely understand if you don't get back to the reviews for a while, RL does of course take precedent. Dana boomer (talk) 11:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh, I absolutely love the pokes. ;) Seriously though, I like them because I tend to forget about my reviews (as you have noticed, I'm sure...) Got a six-page paper done on Sunday, and did eight pages of journals for today, then there is a presentation for Thursday, and finally three exams for next week. I can't wait. :P —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:11, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I found myself with no homework and nothing to do finally, so I went back to Mendip Hills. Canada was already closed as keep, but I would have !voted for that anyway. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  04:00, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I should poke you for some noms. FAR is empty  YellowMonkey  ( vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll )  04:40, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'll try to nom some tomorrow :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  05:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

in gratitude

 * Thanks Cam, I'm glad it passed (without me doing much on the FAC, sorry 'bout that...) ! Would you mind if I added this to my userpage under my featured credits? I was going to create a separate "significant contributions" section, but then I thought the other section would have to be "featured (nominated)" or something awkward. Also, I'm still planning on getting to Kongo soon... —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  04:52, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * By all means, so long as you credit that you worked with me. Same with regards to Kongo. I'm planning to finish of the ACR, have Dank perform a full copyedit, and then I'll start an FAC for the article. Cam (Chat) 23:08, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I will, sort of like I did with Yamato-class battleship (which I don't think I asked for, sorry :/). I need to finish off some FARs, then I will get to Kongo with Whitley. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  23:32, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

Banner
Hehe, glad you like it. Does my amendment look more like what you had in mind? Absolutely no need to attribute - especially as I'd then need to attribute everyone who I've copied and modded various boxes and styles from (and they would probably need to attribute someone too)! Do you think we should put the boxes somewhere on the co-ordinators page in case other people find them useful? Ranger Steve (talk) 21:34, 14 April 2010 (UTC)


 * Oh, thanks for the missing bit of the ACR closure as well! Ranger Steve (talk) 21:36, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's prefect. I tweaked the text a little, but that's it. You could put them on the talk page in the handbook, I think (if you want). You're welcome re ACR! :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  21:47, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Ironically I like your wording better, so now I'm copying you! Also (and despite the fact I edited the page that the request was written on) I managed to ignore your talkpage request about fragmented conversations.  Sorry 'bout that! Ranger Steve (talk) 22:09, 14 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not that big of a deal, no worries :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  23:33, 14 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 12 April 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:51, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Article Assessment?
Wolfgang Harich was a stub that I expanded for a class project and a peer review is required. If you could do that for me, it would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! Nock526 (talk) 04:17, 15 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Checking now! —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  04:25, 15 April 2010 (UTC)

Unusual Main Page appearance
Minas Geraes is on the main page again today, in the on this day column, complete with an image! Now that article has been on the Main page as the TFA, a DYK article, and an OTD article, congrats! -MBK004 00:29, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Awesome! I added that article to the list back in October, and I had mostly forgotten about it until now. :) Thanks! —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:03, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Now we need some terrorists to commandeer it and we have an ITN. (Please don't take that too seriously) <I>NativeForeigner</I> Talk/Contribs/Vote! 06:20, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * That won't happen since she was scrapped in Italy during 1954 :P -MBK004 06:25, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, if Minas Geraes had suffered BRAZILIAN BATTLESHIP São Paulo's fate, that might be possible a'la the French's discovery of FRENCH BATTLESHIP Danton. :( —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)

Tosa
Lacroix, p. 758 says this of Tosa's list: "Unexpectedly, a capped AP shell hit the water about 25 m from the ship's side, with a striking angle of 17 degrees and a residual velocity of 480m/sec.  After a course below the water, the shell struck the port side in the engine room (Frame 228), pierced the 76-mm HT antitorpedo bulkhead, and exploded in the engine room.  Some 3,000 t of water were shipped, and the list increased from 4 degrees 53' to 10 degrees 06'." Cla68 (talk) 03:24, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Cla, I'll incorporate it tonight. Breyer was too general on the list; I think that's what I was remembering, but seeing as I can't view it on Google Books anymore, I needed a little help. Many thanks! —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:15, 17 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I think there needs to be a little more ont he background of the IJN's 8-8-4 (or whatever it was called) fleet expansion program that Tosa was a component of. Kaigun has more information on it, so I'll try to add that over the next several days.  I'll also check Watts and Jentschura for more information. Cla68 (talk) 12:00, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Don't put too much detail into Tosa though--I think the major part of the background should be in Tosa-class battleship. :-) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  20:07, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Oh yea. There probably should be a "more details" link to the Tosa class battleship article at the top of the background section. Cla68 (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Good point, added! —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  23:29, 18 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, I'm all done. Sorry for not telling you. Cla68 (talk) 01:37, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * If you have the information, the coordinates of the position where the ship was scuttled and the depth of the water probably should be included. Cla68 (talk) 04:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

I don't. :/ —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  05:47, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 19 April 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:04, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Hacking
Hi Ed you recently welcomed me to wikipedia. I wrote an article on a book called Hacking: The Art of Exploitation, Second Edition. I am in need of a peer review and I am not really sure how to get someone to do that. If you could help me out and let me know how or maybe even peer review the article yourself that would be great. Thanks Elmsy2424 (talk) 18:16, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hello Elmsy, I will certainly review it! However, there's no way I will get to this before Thursday&mdash;I'm scrambling to get everything done for my classes, something which you are probably familiar with. ;) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:09, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much and I know exactly what you mean. Hope the classes go well! Elmsy2424 (talk) 19:41, 20 April 2010 (UTC)
 * You're welcome, and I hope yours go well too! —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

RE:Oklahoma
Nto like the conversation is going to go on much longer, but, in any case, here. Buggie111 (talk) 19:13, 20 April 2010 (UTC)

Navbar
Ed, I was planning to copy your navbar to help dress up my user page, but I'm wondering why you called most of your non-standard user pages Special:Contributions/ forex? Any particular reason?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:24, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Sturm, the only two special pages I used were Special:Emailuser and Special:Contributions/The_ed17; OMT is obviously in the WP namespace. Barring those, the others are all under User:The_ed17/ ___; my user page, talk page, library, awards, and exercises for newer editors. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:07, 21 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Right, I should have said some. Any particular reason?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 06:10, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry, I misunderstood you. OMT is there because I want people to join it. ;) Special:Emailuser is there for people who can't find/can't be bothered to find the link in the toolbox. My contributions are in there to make it a round number (8). —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  06:13, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

February Shadows
Hi, when I was a new user you welcomed me on my talk page. I have written an article for my Shaping of the Modern World class at Duquesne University and I was wondering if you could review it for me? Please let me know what I can do to improve it. Thanks so much! Paraskevia8 (talk) 23:31, 21 April 2010 (UTC)

Rollback/autoreviewer
Awesome. Thank you very much, sir! - The Bushranger (talk) 17:17, 22 April 2010 (UTC)

GT
Hey, I just noticed once Tosa gets promoted for GA, we'll have another Good Topic ready, between you, me, and Sturmvogel. Parsecboy (talk) 22:52, 22 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey, I didn't realize that. Awesome! (and don't forget Cla, he helped a lot with Tosa :) I think that if we could enlist Cla to add more design information to Tosa-class battleship, we could bring that to FAC. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  05:23, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Yup, April is apparently a good month for OMT; the Brandenburg GT just passed, and there's the Lion and Radetzky classes up for GT as well. I mocked up the Tosa GT box here if you want to nominate it. Feel free to play with it if you like. Parsecboy (talk) 11:07, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Looks good, but should we use File:Tosa construction stop.jpg instead? The model picture isn't very clear at that size... —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  18:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Poke, all are now at GA so it is time to nominate. That would really throw User:Rst20xx for a loop since he already mentioned on the number of OMT noms at once! With the Brandenburg class, then Radetzky, Lion, and Imperator Aleksandr II classes, and now Tosa. Plus the Amagi class only needs Amagi brought to GA. Also, I agree with Ed on the picture for the Tosa topic. -MBK004 07:32, 24 April 2010 (UTC)

Featured article review/Mendip Hills/archive1
Hi The ed17, there is no sign of RodW yet, I assume he is still stuck at an airport as a result of the Icelandic Volcanic ash debacle. I did reply (belatedly, I've only just seen your comment) on the FAC review page about your comments on the reliability of "Student Guide" - I've kept that ref in place but added another cite immediately in front of it. Pyrotec (talk) 13:17, 23 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm checking back now. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  18:19, 23 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Japanese battleship Tosa

 * That's a fantastic article Ed Nick-D (talk) 00:04, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Nick! Cla and the guys over at Tullys Port both deserve a lot of credit as well. :) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  03:52, 24 April 2010 (UTC)
 * There is probably more than one Okinoshima. Tully's would be a good place to ask about it.  My sources said the Bungo Suido. Cla68 (talk) 05:29, 1 May 2010 (UTC)

Feel like a review?
Hi there ed! Since you are the cancelled battleship class writer, could you please review Kii class battleship and Number 13 class battleship for B class? I tried to base the layout off of Design A-150 battleship and Japanese battleship Tosa, both of which you wrote. See you! Buggie111 (talk) 00:20, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Well, I see some unreliable sources, but they're shaping up well. I would offer to help, but I only have Conway's as a decent source. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  00:49, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I think hompage2.nifty is one, but the others seem fine. Help? Buggie111 (talk) 00:52, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Hazegray isn't reliable either, unfortunately. I'll try to spruce these up with Google Books Conway's info (my copy is at home), but if I remember right, there's only a paragraph or two on them. I think I still have Breyer, I'll see what he has too. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:16, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank Goodness for Uboat.net then....--<font style="color:#191970">White Shadows <font style="color:#DC143C">you're breaking up 02:38, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

I've started on Kii, but the Background section needs to be trimmed to two paragraphs max, as it overwhelms the article. These are probably the kind of articles that can only get to GA...there isn't a lot of information. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  08:42, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * I ahd a small, one paragraph explanation of the eight-eight fleet to be put to use on Kii, but then I decided to copy over from Amagi. I'll try and rewrite it for you once I remember it. Buggie111 (talk) 13:09, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Alright. We'll put it up for a DYK and/or GA in a day or so. :-) —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed   (talk  •  majestic titan)  19:30, 25 April 2010 (UTC)
 * It's already up for a DYK. Buggie111 (talk) 22:54, 25 April 2010 (UTC)

TFA
01:05, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Signpost: 26 April 2010
<div style="margin-top:10px; font-size:90%; padding-left:5px; font-family:Georgia, Palatino, Palatino Linotype, Times, Times New Roman, serif;">Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 13:29, 27 April 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Regards, SunCreator (talk) 16:00, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

Wait, so you were that guy...
I just remembered that I asked you if I could create Kenyan general election, 1988 a long time ago wheh I had no idea who you were, and the fact that someday in the future, i'd be (more or less, defaulting towords less) working with you on battleships, of all things! Well, I didn't and someone else has. Thanks for being such a great editor and kind mentor trouhg my periods of wondering. In other nws, are you ready to begin work on USS Oklahoma? I've got to turn the book back in (well, I can renew it, but maybe Friedman would have to go) on MAy 8, which is fast approaching. See you! Buggie111 (talk) 21:05, 29 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay, I moved back home from college today (the semester's over!). I was wondering where I had heard your name before...! No problem at all, and I'm glad to see that you are sticking around (especially glad to see you working on battleships! ;) I am ready to begin on Oklahoma. At the least, we'll get a fair way through it and probably have it close to GA by the time you leave. Re Friedman, if it's U.S. Battleships: A Design History, I have it, so don't worry. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  01:54, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * First thing we need to do is add references and page numbers, followed by copyediting to reword from the DANFS text. —<font face="Baskerville Old Face"> Ed  (talk  •  majestic titan)  02:06, 30 April 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure, busy at the moment, but free in half an hour. Buggie111 (talk) 02:15, 30 April 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 April newsletter
Round two is over, and we are down to our final 32. For anyone interested in the final standings (though not arranged by group) this page has been compiled. Congratulations to, our clear overall round winner, and to and , who were solidly second and third respectively. There were a good number of high scorers this round- competition was certainly tough! Round three begins tomorrow, but anything promoted after the end of round two is eligible for points. 16 contestants (eight pool leaders and eight wildcards) will progress to round four in two months- things are really starting to get competitive. Anything you worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Judge iMatthew has retired from Wikipedia, and we wish him the best. The competition has been ticking over well with minimal need for judge intervention, so thank you to everyone making that possible. A special thank you goes to participants and  for their help in preparing for round three. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 17:39, 30 April 2010 (UTC)