User:The ed17/Archives/34

WikiCup 2010 October newsletter
The 2010 WikiCup is over! It has been a long journey, but what has been achieved is impressive: combined, participants have produced over seventy featured articles, over five hundred good articles, over fifty featured lists, over one thousand one hundred "did you know" entries, in addition to various other pieces of recognised content. A full list (which has yet to be updated to reflect the scores in the final round) can be found here. Perhaps more importantly, we have our winner! The 2010 WikiCup champion is, with an unbelievable 4220 points in the final round. Second place goes to, with 2260, and third to , with 560. Congratulations to our other four finalists –, , and. Also, congratulations to, who withdrew from the competition with an impressive 2685 points earlier in this round.

Prizes will also be going to those who claimed the most points for different types of content in a single round. It was decided that the prizes would be awarded for those with the highest in a round, rather than overall, so that the finalists did not have an unfair advantage. Winning the featured article prize is, for five featured articles in round 4. Winning the good article prize is, for eighty-one good articles in round 5. Winning the featured list prize is, for six featured lists in round 1. Winning the picture and sound award is, for four featured pictures in round 3. Winning the topic award is, for forty-seven articles in various good topics in round 5. Winning the "did you know" award is, for over one hundred did you knows is round 5. Finally, winning the in the news award is, for nineteen articles in the news in round three.

The WikiCup has faced criticism in the last month – hopefully, we will take something positive from it and create a better contest for next year. Like Wikipedia itself, the Cup is a work in progress, and ideas for how it should work are more than welcome on the WikiCup talk page and on the scoring talk page. Also, people are more than welcome to sign up for next year's competition on the signup page. Well done and thank you to everyone involved – the Cup has been a pleasure to run, and we, as judges, have been proud to be a part of it. We hope that next year, however the Cup is working, and whoever is running it, it will be back, stronger and more popular than ever. Until then, goodbye and happy editing! 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 03:12, 1 November 2010 (UTC)

student to mentor
Per recent discussions on the Ambassadors list, we're going to try out assigning mentors to some of the students that don't have one, beginning with Media, Politics & Power in the Digital Age. Would you be willing to mentor User:Burnswiki?

If so, please introduce yourself, perhaps along these lines:

"Hi! I'm Chevymontecarlo, and I've been assigned as your mentor.  (If you'd rather choose your own mentor or don't want one, just let me know; you can request a different mentor from this list of Online Ambassadors.)

I'll keep an eye on your edits as you work on Wikipedia for your class, and try to pitch in where I can. If you'd like any help or advice, please let me know."

After that, don't forget to update Online Ambassadors/Mentors to list your mentees, and if you've reached your limit, move your entry down to the "additional ambassadors" section.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 19:19, 1 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've left a message on his page, thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:48, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Are you up for a few more? The Political Economy of Technology and Science is looking for mentors on a per-article basis (with usually two students per article, but one mentor).  If you've not reached your limit, please sign up as the mentor for Carbon emissions reporting and Micro hydro on the course page, and leave notes introducing yourself for the three students working on those articles (and update the mentors page).  Thanks!--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:43, 3 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Poke. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 16:54, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Whoops, I didn't see this. I can take CER, but I don't see Micro hydro on the course page... Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:03, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Micro hyrdo is third from the bottom. --Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 17:05, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure how I missed that... :-) Thanks Sage. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:07, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Talk page stalkers - we need an editorial, so you should help
Are you interested in writing a piece that will be viewed by all of the Military history WikiProject's 1100+ members? Leave a note at WT:MHNEWS and start writing – we'll need one in the next few days and another about a month from now. A short description of what normal editorials are can be found at WP:MHEDITORIALS, but don't be shy if your idea falls outside that parameter. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:43, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 1 November 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 04:55, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

Spanish tanks
Yea, I promised myself not to buy too many books on tanks, given my new focus on economics, but Amazon.com suggested that book to me when I was looking for econ. books and I just couldn't pass it up, lol. JonCatalán(Talk) 15:01, 2 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hahah, poor Catalan. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:03, 2 November 2010 (UTC)

It's raining thanks spam!

 * Please pardon the intrusion. This tin of thanks spam is offered to everyone who commented or !voted (Support, Oppose or Neutral) on my recent RfA. I appreciate the fact that you care enough about the encyclopedia and its community to participate in this forum.
 * There are a host of processes that further need community support, including content review (WP:GAN, WP:PR, WP:FAC, and WP:FAR). You can also consider becoming a Wikipedia Ambassador. If you have the requisite experience and knowledge, consider running for admin yourself!
 * If you have any further comments, input or questions, please do feel free to drop a line to me on my talk page. I am open to all discussion. Thanks &bull; Ling.Nut (talk) 02:32, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Help please
An editor whom I have a history with along with others (including you, I think), has resurfaced at Talk:USS Texas (BB-35) and wants to cite major changes to the article to his website. Would you mind responding instead of me due to the obvious emotional connection I have with the article (and ship) and keeping in mind how I generally deal with certain issues? Keep in mind that he has clearly stated on his user page Though the Wiki creed is verifiablity, my interest is truth. Major problems can abound due to this... -MBK004 08:00, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 8 November 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 17:46, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Nomination of Border Legion (Shannara) for deletion
A discussion has begun about whether the article Border Legion (Shannara), which you created or to which you contributed, should be deleted. While contributions are welcome, an article may be deleted if it is inconsistent with Wikipedia policies and guidelines for inclusion, explained in the deletion policy.

The article will be discussed at Articles for deletion/Border Legion (Shannara) until a consensus is reached, and you are welcome to contribute to the discussion.

You may edit the article during the discussion, including to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion template from the top of the article. Abductive (reasoning) 05:53, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Reorganization Plan No. 3
-- Cirt (talk) 06:09, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

online ambassadors
How did you sign up for that program? I'm interested. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 19:28, 10 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Cam, it's actually pretty cool. :-) Take a look at Online Ambassadors. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:35, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Selected anniversaries
Lol, you finally came round for another addn!  YellowMonkey  ( new photo poll )  01:54, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I figured it was unusual enough to be a good SA. :-) I'm pretty sure it is also Brazil's largest-ever naval disaster, but I can't find a post-1945 source to confirm that. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:44, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Well I chucked all of Lecen's Brazil and Pedro stuff on there. Some of them have gone a bit angry on Talk:Main Page. They just complain all the time and then replace Vietnam FAs with random unsourced start class articles instead of sifting through the thousands of unused FA/A/GAs. Ah what would we do without the chattering classes who just sit on ITN/C and MP and moan all day  YellowMonkey  ( new photo poll )  08:14, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Sub
Hello

I don`t know exactly how to handle with something like this in en.wiki but in pl.wiki at least this japan part will be deleted (and second part reformatted). PMG (talk) 13:20, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * USS Needlefish (SS-379) and other - problem is that there is reference U.S. Submarines Through 1945 pp. 305-311 - but no other info about that book. Can you check this ? Its coming from Template:Fleet-boat-propulsion-early-GM-4-GE but there is also no definition of this. Reference name "FriedmanSubs1-engines" say something, but still its not visible in article.PMG (talk) 15:03, 11 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hop hop. PMG (talk) 06:57, 15 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. I think that is okay in a reference.
 * It's Friedman, Norman (1995). U.S. Submarines Through 1945: An Illustrated Design History. Annapolis, Maryland: United States Naval Institute. ISBN 1-55750-263-3. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:16, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Manhattan Project and fluoride chemistry
Hello, and thank you very much for your comments at the DYK nomination page. All of the currently used volatile anesthetic agents, including methoxyflurane, are fluorinated haloalkanes. With the exception of halothane, all of them are also halogenated ethers. All of them, including halothane, were first synthesized as a direct result of research that was conducted in support of the Manhattan Project. The first of these to appear in clinical use was halothane, in 1956.

The field of halogen and organofluorine chemistry was poorly understood until around 1942, when the chemists, chemical engineers and physicists of the Manhattan Project turned their attention to the problem of separating uranium-235 from uranium-238. These two isotopes are nearly identical in all respects, including their molecular weights. The problem was ultimately solved by Francis Simon and Nicholas Kurti, when they figured out that the two isotopes could be separated by gaseous diffusion.

First however the uranium had to be rendered into a gaseous form. Uranium hexafluoride (UF6) was selected after chemists figured out how to synthesize UF6. Among the team of chemists involved was William T. Miller, the man who first synthesized methoxyflurane as a byproduct of this organofluorine chemistry research. So you can see that the volatile anesthetic agents of today are really a spin-off of the technology developed during the Manhattan Project.

I believe this information deserves a separate section within the Manhattan Project article: "Spin-off tecnologies". I will eventually add this section, and link it to the halothane and methoxyflurane articles. Thanks again for your interest! DiverDave (talk) 17:22, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Can any of this be added to the methoxyflurane article, perhaps in a new section entitled "Background"? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:26, 14 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree that this is interesting background information. Despite the fact that we are surrounded by countless examples in our daily lives, many people remain unaware of the military roots of much of the technology that has so profoundly influenced human civilization. I have just added the aforementioned section into the Manhattan Project article. I have to think of a way to write a sentence in the methoxyflurane article that links to this new section. Feel free to do this yourself, if you are interested. I do not own either of these articles. Respectfully, DiverDave (talk) 19:53, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 November 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:36, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
Lexlythius (talk) 04:23, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Drone attacks in Pakistan

 * I just saw that you have reverted additional edits that are not disputed before you locked up the article. I guess that happened by mistake i request you re-add this information now as it is not disputed. Thank you. IQinn (talk) 18:11, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

DC and contributions
Greetings! Please excuse this intrusion on your talk page, and allow me to invite you to participate in the newly-formed Wikipedia Contribution Team (WP:CONTRIB for short)! The goal of the team is to attract more and better contributions to the English Wikipedia, as well as to help support the fundraising team in our financial and editing contribution goals. We have lots of stuff to work on, from minor and major page building, to WikiProject outreach, article improvement, donor relations, and more—in fact, part of our mission is to empower team members to make their own projects to support our mission. Some of our projects only take a few minutes to work on, while others can be large, multi-person tasks—whatever your interest level, we're glad to have you.

If this sounds interesting, please visit WP:CONTRIB and sign onto the team. Even if there does not appear to be anything that really speaks out as being work you'd like to do, I'd encourage you to join and follow the project anyway, as the type of work we'll be doing will certainly evolve and change over time. If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to contact me, or ask on the team talk page. Regards, &rArr;  Dan  Rosenthal    Wikipedia Contribution Team  02:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)


 * As an aside, I'm also a local DC Wikimedian. We'd love for you to attend the next DC meetups. I'm specifically contacting you as you expressed interest in the Campus Ambassador position, and both the DC Wikimedians group and the Wikipedia Contributions Team have a lot of interest in working along with the Campus Ambassadors. You can reach me on my talk page, or by email at drosenthal@wikimedia.org with questions; I can't guarantee that I'll be checking back on your talk page often enough to hold a sustained conversation there. Regards, &rArr;  Dan  Rosenthal    Wikipedia Contribution Team  02:55, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Bunkers in Albania
I fixed the number for DYK--Vinie007 06:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Online Ambassador selection process
Please share you views on the current version of the proposed Online Ambassador selection process, which the steering committee has recommended for adoption by the ambassadors program. Once we settle on a selection process, we can start recruiting more Online Ambassadors for next term (in which we will have more students, and the students will be more involved with mentors from early on).--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 15:18, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Almirante Latorre-class battleship
The DYK project (nominate) 12:02, 21 November 2010 (UTC)


 * Nice work, both on this article, as well as Chilean battleship Almirante Latorre! However I noticed that you redirected the old HMS Canada (1913) stub.  Are you planning to re-write it into a full-fledged article as well?  The first time I read the Canada stub, I especially enjoyed the bit about parts being removed during her scrapping for the repair of Mikasa.  Regards, — Kralizec! (talk) 17:45, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kralizec! I can't find a reliable source for that information or I would have included it in the new version of the article, see WT:OMT (incidentally, if you can view the NYT article there, I'd greatly appreciate it). I'm not going to write a Canada article because the relevant bits are included in Almirante Latorre – besides the Battle of Jutland, the ship did little in WWI. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:15, 21 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) 23:04, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 November 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 01:42, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Latin American warships
Ed, I'm sorry for not answering you eralier. Only now I noticed you invitation to help you out with Brazilian warships of the beginning of the 20th century. Unfortunately, there is no possible way I might help you with that since my focus is the imperial era. To be more precise, Brazilian political history during the Empire. I have little knowledge concerning Brazilian weapons, ships, military formation, etc... What could do is translate any passage of a Portuguese-written book if you need to. Regards, --Lecen (talk) 21:46, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Lecen, I actually didn't think you would reply – I meant that purely as a joke! :-) Thanks for the offer, and if I can help you in any way with Brazilian naval history in imperial or modern times, just leave me a message. I am going to be rewriting BRAZILIAN BATTLESHIP São Paulo soon; if your sources have any tidbits on her, I'd appreciate it! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:02, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I know that by the end of the Empire Brazil had a more powerful navy than the United States and I have a book which says that it was the fifth or sixth most powerful in the world. Obviously, once the U.S., Japan and Germany began their arms races in the 1890s and Brazil fell behind as it entered in a long period of political and economical chaos after the republican coup, the Brazilian navy became a mere shadow of what was once. Do you have any book that tells exactly what was the position of the Brazilian navy at the end of the Empire in comparison to other navies? --Lecen (talk) 22:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I won't have my books with me until Sunday, but I will check Scheina's Latin America: A Naval History, 1810–1987 and English's Armed Forces of Latin America when I get back. They should have an approximate tonnage number at least. From memory, the Brazilian Navy only had a real period of dominance from 1883–1887ish, when Argentina and Chile's full-fledged naval arms race started coming to fruition. The ironclad Riachuelo (1883) and Aquidabã (1886) startled the United States into constructing Maine and Texas, their first two battleships, because of (not entirely far-fetched) concerns that Riachuelo could single-handedly destroy the entire U.S. Navy, which was centered around totally obsolete Civil War-era monitors. However, the ships were matched by Argentina's Independencia and Nueve de Julio (later Livertad) and Chile's Capitan Prat in 1890, and Maine and Texas were commissioned in 1895. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:10, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, as I imagined. In the 1890s Brazil collapsed. The new republican regime was too weak and the government was uncapable of upholding any politic or economic stability. The navy was completely ignored as other countries began improving their own.
 * Ed, I'd like to know if you could take a look in an article I nominated as FAC: José Paranhos, Viscount of Rio Branco. It is closely related to Pedro II of Brazil. It would be good to see your opinion on whether you support or oppose its nomination. Please, do not feel pressured at all on reading the article. If you do not enjoy the subject or do not have the time I will understand. Don't worry. Thank you very much, --Lecen (talk) 12:42, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yes, the only relatively new ships at the turn of the 20th century were two cruisers and two small, relatively weak coastal defense battleships (Brazilian battleship Minas Geraes).
 * I certainly can, but I won't get to it until Saturday at the earliest. The lead looks pretty good, though I gave it a copyedit. See what you think! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:46, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yep, tanks for your help. Ed, do you enjoy working on warships-related articles or also in armed conflicts-related articles? --Lecen (talk) 17:35, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm still working through it. :-) I would enjoy both, although I've never written a land battle article. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:47, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I wanted to know what would be necessary to bring Platine War from good to featured. I'm good at biographical articles, not war articles. Certainly the prose is an issue, but I wonder myself if the information is enough. --Lecen (talk) 18:27, 30 November 2010 (UTC)
 * To me it doesn't appear to be missing essential information, so I think you could nominate it right now. You could try Milhist's A-class review process first if you'd like. Also try comparing it to War of the Bavarian Succession, probably the best war FA. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:09, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Pedro II of Brazil's article is suffering major vanalism attacks. Is there something that can be done?--Lecen (talk) 01:20, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * I've protected it for a few hours; the vandalism should die down by then. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Ed, could you protect the page again? --Lecen (talk) 17:11, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. There was a large amount of attempted changes to established facts (like birth years?) rather than simple vandalism... odd. Normally they just blank the entire page. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:21, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
 * At last I had the chance to read War of the Bavarian Succession as you suggested. The article itself is brilliant. Whoever wrote it did an spetacular job. Unfortunately, I won't be able to do the same with South American military conflicts-related articles. You have no idea of how poor are the articles about Brazilian history in Wikipedia. They are usually too short and full of mistakes. I won't be able to write anything about the War of the Triple Alliance if no one knows nothing about the Empire of Brazil, Pedro II or the Duke of Caxias and so on. Right now I'm writing Empire of Brazil and I had the unfortunate opportunity of understanding how hard, complex and huge are the articles about countries. But I believe once it's done, it will be a fine article. Anyway, I'd like to thank you for all your help. I know how little time we have in here and how much stuff we have to do. Thank you for taking your time and having the patience to review Rio Branco's article. Regards my friend, --Lecen (talk) 13:01, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Happy Thanksgiving & a Question
Happy Thanksgiving, Ed. What do the following articles ahve in common:


 * Carrier Strike Group Eleven
 * Carrier Strike Group One
 * Carrier Strike Group Ten
 * Carrier Strike Group Three
 * Carrier Strike Group Two
 * Harry S. Truman Carrier Strike Group
 * John C. Stennis Carrier Strike Group
 * Carrier Air Wing Six
 * Exercise Verity
 * Western Union Defence Organization
 * Nora W. Tyson

The answer is three-fold:


 * 1) I wrote all of them, except Nora W. Tyson which was initiated by NortyNort.
 * 2) Most received a DYK citation.
 * 3) All are considered Start-rated articles.

Ed, could you please review these articles. I believe that I am doing all of the correct things to rate a B-Class listing. In fact, the last article that I have written that rated a B-Class listing was Operation Grand Slam (NATO) which I also created my first disambiguation page. My long-term objective is to write articles on both numbered and named carrier strike groups, as well as their associated destroyer squadrons (DESRON) and earlier carrier battle groups. However, it is dispiriting to see one's efforts not receiving the appropriate recognition, and the nameless reviewer of these article gives a rating but no guidance beyond a listing a deficiencies. How can you make improvements?

Finally, I am confused that Carrier Strike Group Eleven is considered a Start article when compared to Carrier Air Wing Eleven, Carrier Air Wing Fourteen, and Carrier Air Wing Eight which are B-Class articles.

Thanks for your help and Happy Thanksgiving.Marcd30319 (talk) 14:56, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Marc! Since I had a few extra minutes, I went through the articles above and rated all of them B-class except for Western Union Defence Organization. Upon reading through that article, I didn't get a real sense of what that organization actually did, so it needs more work in terms of coverage. The rest of them look quite good, and many of them (especially the strike group articles) would probably have a good shot at GAN with a bit more polishing. Dana boomer (talk) 15:34, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Marc, nice to see you around again. I hope you enjoyed plenty of turkey today! In the future, you can list the articles at the requests page as you write them so that they will be reassessed. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 03:46, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Caldera Bay
Hey Ed! Happy Thanksgiving! I spent most of the day watching the Lions-Patriots game and doing assorted RL work. I was wondering if you could help me with User:Buggie111/Battle of Caldera Bay, a page I started way back when and would like to get to GA. Considering that you are the South american early 20th century naval warfare guru, I thought that you would be able to spice this guy up. Any help? Buggie111 (talk) 21:25, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Hey Buggie, Happy Thanksgiving to you too. I went to my Grandma's and watched the poor Lions lose too. I managed to get $10 from my Grandpa (we made a bet that if the Lions didn't make it to 8-8, he would pay me $10 and vice versa!) ;-)
 * I should be able to contribute a little. If I remember right, Schenia has a bit in Latin America: A Naval History, and there should also be information in Latin America's Wars (Volume I). Give me a couple weeks though – I have a lot on my plate with one more week of classes followed immediately by exams. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * I've felt that before. Patriots should be able to get to the Super Bowl. Thanks! Buggie111 (talk) 21:42, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if I seem to forget and it's like 15 December, just remind me. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
 * It's December 17th and I have reminded you. Buggie111 (talk) 18:56, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Yoohoo? 01:51, 23 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Sorry Buggie. I'll get to this asap. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:55, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

That's nothing. I myself am busy now. Buggie111 (talk) 19:13, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 November 2010
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 22:17, 29 November 2010 (UTC)