User:The ed17/Archives/44

WikiCup 2011 July newsletter
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:


 * , Pool A's winner. Casliber has the highest total score in the competition, with 1528, the bulk of which is made up of 8 featured articles. He has the highest number of total featured articles (8, 1 of which was eligible for double points) and total did you knows (72) of any finalist. Casliber writes mostly on biology, including ornithology, botany and mycology.
 * , Pool B's winner and the highest scorer this round. PresN is the only finalist who has scored featured topic points, and he has gathered an impressive 330, but most of his points come from his 4 featured articles, one of which scored double. PresN writes mostly on video games and the Hugo Awards.
 * , Pool A's runner-up. Hurricanehink's points are mostly from his 30 good articles, more than any other finalist, and he is also the only finalist to score good topic points. Hurricanehink, as his name suggests, writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , Pool B's runner-up. Wizardman has completed 86 good article reviews, more than any other finalist, but most of his points come from his 2 featured articles. Wizardman writes mostly on American sport, especially baseball.
 * , the "fastest loser" (Pool A). Miyagawa has written 3 featured lists, one of which was awarded double points, more than any other finalist, but he was awarded points mostly for his 68 did you knows. Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, including dogs, military history and sport.
 * , the second "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Resolute's points come from his 9 good articles. He writes mostly on Canadian topics, including ice hockey.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool A). Most of Evan's points come from his 10 good articles, and he writes mostly on meteorology.
 * , who was joint third "fastest loser" (Pool B). Most of Phil's points come from his 9 good articles, 4 of which (more than any other finalist) were eligible for double points. He writes mostly on aeronautics.

We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists,, , , , , and. Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.

In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate. The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.

A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! 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 and The ed17 00:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

This Month in GLAM: August 2011
Unsubscribe · Global message delivery 18:12, 2 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:Featured_article_candidates/HMS_Hood_(51)/archive1
Did Sturm answer your questions? - Dank (push to talk) 00:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I never saw his replies, sorry. I'll take a look tomorrow. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:15, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 6, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/September 6, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  20:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)

 

Almirante Latorre was a super-dreadnought battleship built for the Chilean Navy. She was the first of a planned two-ship class. Construction began soon after the ship was ordered in November 1911, and was approaching completion when she was bought by the United Kingdom's Royal Navy for use in the First World War. Commissioned in September 1915, she served in the Grand Fleet as HMS Canada for the duration of the war and saw action during the Battle of Jutland. Canada was repurchased by Chile in 1920. She took back her original name of Almirante Latorre, and served as Chile's flagship and frequently as presidential transport. In September 1931, crewmen aboard Almirante Latorre instigated a mutiny, which the majority of the Chilean fleet quickly joined. After divisions developed between the mutineers, the rebellion fell apart and the ships were returned to government control. Almirante Latorre was put into reserve for a time in the 1930s due to a severe economic depression, but she was in good enough condition to receive interest from the United States after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This was declined and the ship spent most of the Second World War on patrol for Chile. The elderly battleship was scrapped in Japan beginning in 1959. (more...)


 * Nice work Ed. Nick-D (talk) 01:55, 4 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thsnks Nick Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:15, 4 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 September 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:56, 6 September 2011 (UTC)

WP:FOUR for Japanese battleship Tosa

 * Congrats! Buggie111 (talk) 00:30, 7 September 2011 (UTC)

Bugle op-ed
Hi mate, not sure when you're planning to put this month's paper to bed but if we still need an op-ed and there's a few hours to spare I could pen a reflection/observation on September 11 that's been playing in my mind -- nothing too radical, more a recollection of the impact at the time, and a reminder about victims and survivors, and soldiers deployed as a result of the attack. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * That's a fantastic idea. If you don't mind, I'll one up you and propose this: how about we have a multinational op-ed with contributions from Australia, the US, Canada, Britain, and/or wherever else we can think of or want to include? If you don't think this is a good idea, I don't mind. :P The deadline is September 11th, actually, as almost all the page views come on the first two days, and I'd like to get the note about the elections to our members before the 14th. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 05:07, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It makes me sad when people say "3000 Americans died on September 11". The fact is that people from many countries died in that attack.  The majority were Americans, but the following countries lost ten or more citizens in that attack: Australia (11), Canada (24), Columbia (17),  Germany (11), India (41), Italy (10), Jamaica (16), Japan (24), United Kingdom (66), Trindad and Tobago (14), South Korea (28), Phillippines (16), and Mexico (16).  Let's remember and mourn them all.  The many countries with single digit losses had reason to mourn, as did all compassionate people everywhere. We still mourn.  Cullen 328   Let's discuss it  05:41, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Cullen, I guess then that you're supporting Ed's proposal for a multinational op-ed...?! Actually I have no prob with that either (I'm Australian by the way), and if the distribution date for the Bugle is still a few days away it'd give us time to collect those additional thoughts. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 07:40, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I think he does. Yes, I definitely know you're Australian by now. :P Who else do we know that we can ask to contribute? I can think of EyeSerene (British), Cam (Canadian), and we may be able to get Catalan out of the shadows (half-Spanish), but we'll probably need a couple others that aren't from the west. I'm thinking six or seven would be a good number? Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:21, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh, HJ is also British, MisterBee1966 is German, Lecen is from Brazil, I think Jappalang lives in Singapore, and you can pick a lot of different people for the US reaction... I'm leaving it to you to pick and ask who you think we should include so we get an eclectic array of viewpoints. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:11, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hmm, with so many nationalities involved I wonder if it isn't easier to invite additional submissions from the MilHist talk page... Anyway, I'll put something together as a starting point and we can go from there. BTW, I know you know I'm an Aussie, Ed, taht bit was just for Cullen's benefit... ;-) Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:03, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * If we had more time that would work, but we need people to write these either today or tomorrow. :P Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:11, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, fair enough. Here's a draft -- let me know if reads okay and I'll post to the August op-ed page and then canvass a few people to see if they'd like to add to it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 08:12, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a little rambly – you may want to focus it a bit more. Otherwise it looks fine to me! :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:22, 9 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Tweaked a bit. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 00:52, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Looks good to me. Let me know if you want me to add something to it, and remember that we have about a day before we have to send it out! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 01:55, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Started draft op-ed page with my contrib and left messages for most of those above. You could appoint yourself the US representative, methinks... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 02:29, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Alright haha, I'll write something up tomorrow. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:16, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Well we have four pieces there now, might be reasonable to rejig the order, e.g. starting with those focussing on the day itself, such as MisterBee, and ending with those looking at today or tomorrow, like myself and Eye -- but that's just a thought, we can wait until the last minute and a few more entries to do that, and of course you as editor can have final say... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:29, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, let's collect them all and worry about presentation later. :-) This is your op-ed, so do it how you like! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:13, 10 September 2011 (UTC)

Unessarary rm
Since i couldnt type it all in the history box in the page ill say it hear,

Ed your joking. I was helping out that guy out and directing him to the relevant pages, something that you and many admins do praticially everyday. Besides i found it unfair that everyone is moaning at dapi to come back, hes probably having a hard time; something that i know all to well.

Removing posts like this is totally bad faith on your part, tell me what is wrong with this?

Im afriad people move on see VOLUNTEER and Retiring From what i gather/believe Dapi had a dispute with one or more administrators which eventually led to him being banned for a week or so. Banning_policy Although at any rate, he decided to retire due to personal problems/stress. It happens. We'll all experience it from time to time. Theres plenty of other editors anyway, if you want some advice or any quieries/questions regarding modern history (i.e ,1900-1982 although i do know a fair bit about the Napoleonic wars and the german and italian unifcation wars in the 1800s) Then im the guy to ask. Goldblooded (talk) 01:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

I was helping the guy who wanted him to come back (i dont think english is his fist languge anyway) so i'd thought id just point out a few links and he seemed to wanted to question dapi about history or something along that lines so i put myself forward instead. Whats wrong with that? I was helpfull, assumed good faith and i offered myself foward.

Removing edits like that, as ive said is completely bad faith, perhaps the other thing i said to that other guy was a bit more heated -

- Give the guy a break, See WP:VOLUNTEER If he doesn't want to come back then he wont, If he does then he'll come back of his own accord; by the sounds of things he seemed rather stressed and worn out and moaning at him isn't going to help. Goldblooded (talk) 01:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

All i was saying was that if hes gunna come back he'll do it if not he wont, moaning at him wont help. And it wont.

So anyway i've seen you around before and ive noticed that you seem to have some sort of alliance with certain members on wikipedia and as i said theres no reason at all to remove my posts when im talking to them, Paticulary when im trying to help out. Give the newbies a chance. No wonder 100s of possible new wikipedians get scared away by admins. You should be greatfull that i actually decided to stay on wikipedia. Goldblooded (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I believe Parsecboy gave you an appropriate response on his talk page. We don't have any sort of alliance; we just run into each other often as we work in the same areas of the wiki. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:08, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

Fair enough but it does seem that way also on Dapi's own page but anyway i assume your watching Parsecboy's page so i've already given a reply there. Goldblooded (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2011 (UTC)

HMS Hood FAC
Ed, can you look over Featured article candidates/HMS Hood (51)/archive1 to see if I've addressed your issues?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Whoops, Dank asked me to do this once before. Sorry. I'll get back at you tonight when I'm back in my apartment. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:14, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ping.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 17:12, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

EdwardsBot
I made some adjustments here. Use a test page first so you don't send a silly message out to a lot of people. You'll have to make a test list somewhere. Also, when the bot signs, it'll sign as itself. Usually you want to put your user name/talk page/etc. links in there directly and then just insert a timestamp (with five tildes). Hope that helps. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Ah, alright, will do. Thanks very much! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:59, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXVI, August 2011
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

POTD notification
Hi Ed,

Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:USS New Jersey (BB-16) in camouflage coat, 1918 edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 13, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-09-13.  howcheng  {chat} 18:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)

Could you give some guidance?
Hope all is well, Ed17. I need some guidance on some articles that I have written that are going through the editorial meat-grinder courtesy of Buckshot06 and GraemeLeggett.


 * Exercise Grand Slam
 * Exercise Longstep
 * Operation Deep Water
 * Operation Strikeback

Okay, I am fine with the re-branding of the first two articles listed above. However, the wholesale elimination of background information, particularly the strategic overview, removes the historic context for these military exercises. Finally, I think it is bad policy and disrespectful for these editors to make such sweeping changes to articles that I created, and would not exist except through my efforts, without first consulting me and discussing these changes. This is contrary to what Wikipedia is suppose to be and not consistent to a spirit of collaboration. Sorry I am tossing this to you, but you have always been reasonable and fair-minded, as well as being an early sponsor for Operation Strikeback.Marcd30319 (talk) 11:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi TheEd17, greetings again. I feel - and Graeme may share my view - that Marcd30319 has been inserting a significant amount of material into these articles that do not actually bear on the articles' subjects. This information, such as details about 280mm artillery placed an article about in a Mediterranean naval exercise, is best portrayed in articles which have been linked several times in the articles, but not in these articles themselves. They belong 'higher up' in the hierarchy, such as in the main NATO article, the NATO regional command articles, etc. These articles need to focus on the details of the exercise - and there must be more detail to find, particularly with non-US participant units. Put simply, this info isn't about the subject of the articles and is better placed elsewhere. Cheers Buckshot06 (talk) 14:13, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * (copied from my talkpage, from Graeme Leggett):I think some common approach is needed on NATO exercise articles. On the one hand, some degree of background is necessary for each article to be put into context: eg with respect to current doctrine or the results of the previous similar exercise, or a change in the political situation. On the other hand, I think largely political rather than operational viewpoints are too distant from the point and overlong quotes are not useful - deprecated even per MoS etc. Is this something worth flagging up at the MilHist talkpages. GraemeLeggett (talk) 14:43, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Graeme Leggett - I can see that as a valid observation, and you may want to look at my re-write of the Strategic overview section for Operation Deep Water. If this is acceptable, I would be more than happy to follow this approach in the above articles as well as any future naval or military exercise article that I may write.Marcd30319 (talk) 15:54, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Graeme - or we can work towards a compromise, as Marc is proposing above. :-) If you want to use my talk page to hash one out, I'm fine with that. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:52, 14 September 2011 (UTC)

Operation Deep Water - Strategic overview
On Ed17 talk page, Graeme Leggett noted that: "I think some common approach is needed on NATO exercise articles. On the one hand, some degree of background is necessary for each article to be put into context: eg with respect to current doctrine or the results of the previous similar exercise, or a change in the political situation. On the other hand, I think largely political rather than operational viewpoints are too distant from the point and overlong quotes are not useful - deprecated even per MoS etc. Is this something worth flagging up at the MilHist talkpages?" Given the fact that the Eisenhower administration developed its so-called "New Look" approach in defense strategy which emphasized massive retaliation, and this policy represents an evolution from the containment policy of the Truman administration. Also, for the U.S. Navy, historian Samuel P. Huntington set forth a naval strategy oriented to naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea. This strategic background is appropriate and essential to understanding the historical context for NATO exercises in 1957. This assertion that this is covered by other articles is not appropriate approach and does a disservice to our user audience. I therefore reverts the edited text to the original content. See talk page for this article.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Based upon feedback from Graeme Leggett and Buckshot06, I have moved the STRIKFORSOUTH information in a greatly truncated form into the Operational summary section of the article, leaving the Strategic overview information in the Background section. I do this in the spirit of collaboration and amenity.  Regarding the article's sketchiness, as its original creator, I did my due diligence on its research, but if anyone can locate additional information on Operation Deep Water, then by all means bring it forward for us to examine.Marcd30319 (talk) 16:05, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Operation Deep Water - Command structure
The suggestion that this background information is duplicative and unnecessary is an absolute non sequitur. Please note that Naval Striking and Support Forces Southern Europe did not exist at the time of such earlier NATO Southern Region military exercise as 1952's Exercise Longstep and 1952's Exercise Grand Slam. In fact, Naval Striking and Support Forces Southern Europe (STRIKFORSOUTH) was created after the creation of Allied Forces Mediterranean (AFMED) under Lord Mountbatten, and STRIKFORSOUTH was created to maintain American control over U.S. nuclear weapons on U.S. Sixth Fleet aircraft carrier in accordance with the McMahon Act. Therefore, this background information on the command structure for Operation Deep Water is approbriate. Consequently, the assertion that this information is covered by other articles is incorrect and also does a disservice to our user audience to exclude this information for this article. I therefore reverts the edited text to the original content. See talk page for this article.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Based upon feedback from Graeme Leggett and Buckshot06, I have moved the STRIKFORSOUTH information in a greatly truncated form into the Operational summary section of the article, leaving the Strategic overview information in the Background section. I do this in the spirit of collaboration and amenity.  Regarding the article's sketchiness, as its original creator, I did my due diligence on its research, but if anyone can locate additional information on Operation Deep Water, then by all means bring it forward for us to examine.Marcd30319 (talk) 16:04, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 September 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2011 (UTC)

Please sign the MOU for your pods
Just a reminder to sign ( ~ ) the Memorandum of Understanding at United States Education Program/MOU/sign for the pods for the courses you have signed up for. -- Donald Albury 20:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance (2)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 23, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/September 23, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors or his delegate, or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tb hotch .™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions.  19:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

 

ARA Moreno was a dreadnought battleship designed by the American Fore River Shipbuilding Company for the Argentine Navy (Armada de la República Argentina). Named after Mariano Moreno, a key member of the first independent government of Argentina, the First Assembly (Primera Junta), Moreno was the second ship in the Rivadavia-class battleship. Argentina placed orders for Moreno and her only sister ship, ARA Rivadavia, in response to a Brazilian naval building program and border disputes, particularly in the River Plate area. During their construction, the two dreadnoughts were subject to numerous rumors involving Argentina selling the two battleships to a country engaged in the First World War, but these proved to be false. After Moreno was completed in March 1915, a series of engine problems occurred during her sea trials which delayed her delivery to Argentina to May 1915. The next decade saw the ship based in Puerto Belgrano as part of the Argentine Navy's First Division before sailing to the United States for an extensive refit in 1924 and 1925. During the 1930s the ship was occupied with diplomatic cruises to Brazil, Uruguay, and Europe until the Second World War broke out. Decommissioned in 1949, Moreno was scrapped in Japan beginning in 1957. (more...)


 * Hot dang, two in one month! Congrats, Ed. Parsecboy (talk) 20:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Gee, this will never happen again! Thanks Nate. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 21:28, 17 September 2011 (UTC)

Titan's cross nomination
Hello,. I see that you are a member of WP:OMT. I am reminding you that there is a discussion [here] about whther or not to award Bahamut0013, a member of OMt who passsed awsay a short while ago, the Titan's Cross in silver. your opinion will be welcome. Thanks, Buggie111 (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
I suppose I should qualify this one by saying that I do wish I was issuing it under better circumstances. For that matter, I'm sure you wish you were receiving it under better circumstances. Still, though, thanks for the copyedit. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yup. His death is a great loss to the world. Thanks Tom. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:54, 19 September 2011 (UTC)

Vittorio Veneto class
Hey Ed, I was thinking of working on this article, to get it to at least GA standard, and I had a question. A number of sources I've seen (including Conways and Ian Allan's Italian Warships of World War II) call it the Littorio class. A simple google books search seems to prefer Littorio (nearly 600 hits vs 140 for Vittorio Veneto). FWIW, the USN also called them the Littorio class during the war. Anyway, I saw you were the one who moved it to the current name a couple years ago, and wondered how you felt about changing it back? Parsecboy (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)


 * On a side note, do you happen to have Garzke & Dulin? I don't have it at the moment, and some pages are of course missing from the Google Books preview. Parsecboy (talk) 18:50, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I have no objection. I don't remember why I didn't look at more sources before moving the article. Re side note, I don't have it at school with me, and I don't know when I'll make a trip home :/ Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:23, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 September 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 10:46, 20 September 2011 (UTC)

South American dreadnought race
Hi, Ed. I don't have it here with me right now, but I'm going to travel and visit my parents in a couple of weeks and then I could check it out and bring it back with me. What are you looking for? --Lecen (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
 * It's a pleasure to help, but as I said before, you'll have to wait a couple of weeks until I get my book. Do you know if all photos owned by the brazilian navy can be brought to Commons or only the ones that can be seen in the navy's official website? --Lecen (talk) 21:18, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The reason why I asked that is because I found a website full of photos of the Minas Geraes and São Paulo dreadnoughts. If you place the mouse cursor over the photos, you'll see that in a few of them the description "(Foto: SDM)" will appear. "SDM" stands for "Serviço de Documentação da Marinha" (Service of Documentation of the Navy). Those are pictures found in the Brazilian Navy's archives. If they could be used here, you would be able to fill all those articles with many good pictures of both battleships. --Lecen (talk) 13:37, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

FA
Is that a South American Battleship I see as a featured article? Nice work :] – GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, yes it is. Can't imagine who'd be writing on a topic like that. ;-) Thanks! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:16, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Congrats Ed! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 20:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC)


 * HAHA. Thanks Bushranger! Long time no see; hope you're well. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:33, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I WikiBreaked for awhile. RL derp, then got sucked into the black hole that is Minecraft. Returning to normalcy now though and good to be back! :) - The Bushranger One ping only 07:49, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds like fun. ;-) I'm very glad to see you back! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

SCSU
Hi Ed, my name is Tom Peters User:bythefire and I am a member of Professor Tess Marchant-Shapiro's User:Marchantshapiro Political Participation class. She has you listed as our Online Ambassador. I hope I am writing to the correct person and I hope to be able to use you as a resource in the future. Bythefire (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Excellent, Thank you for the information Ed. I look forward to working with you in the near future. Bythefire (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Ed, I followed my course assignment link to this point. Would you like me to talk to you through here or the page I originally contacted you on? By the way, the page that I am going to be working on is the Outdoor Advertising Association of America. I was going to post a link to it here, but apparently entering the name with { these brackets around it doesn't work. I guess that is my first question. How do I figure out what the name of the page is so I can use it as a link? Thank you for your help. Tom Bythefire (talk) 19:25, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Please disregard the first question. I now realize that I came to the same place from two different points. Bythefire (talk) 19:26, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi again! This page is fine; I think the other one emails me(?). Links require  and  around them – that will create Outdoor Advertising Association of America. The title of the page (at the top) is the one you want to link, so for example this one is "User talk:The ed17". Cheatsheet may also help you. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 19:55, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Awesome, thank you! Bythefire (talk) 21:46, 25 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Hi Ed! I hope all is well. Smallozzi (talk) 13:41, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hi Steph! It's not too bad for me, just class 1-2:40 and work 3-close. Hope life in Connecticut is being good to you! (less cold than here, at least) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hello Ed. I've just been updated my page to get ready to move over but when I have switch it on the main page and press preview I get the messages: "The topic of this article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (October 2011)" and "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)". I believe I went a little over-the-top with references, but obviously not! The first one concerns me because I don't want to update the page and then my account get suspended because the article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. How would I go about fixing these problems before I transfer my sandbox to the main article ? Thank you, Chris. ChrisMcBSCSU (talk) 04:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much for your advice! I will definitely do all of that. I have just been piecing together everything tonight and I see your point on the quotations. I was under the impression I had to upload it to the main article today for class but I'm actually unsure. I won't do it until, as you say, it's more thorough with more of my own words. I was just going to keep editing it as the semester went with how it was now, but I'll put more detail in it before I do that. I do also have to create a Do You Know short/page for submission; any hints for creating one of those? Otherwise, thank you for getting back so quickly! ChrisMcBSCSU (talk) 05:28, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, my photo has been deleted. :-( — Preceding unsigned comment added by ChrisMcBSCSU (talk • contribs) 22:18, 30 October 2011 (UTC)

Political Participation (Tess Marchant-Shapiro)
Hey there, Ed! I've been approached by a couple of students from the above referenced course, requesting that I work with them as mentor. After a quick glance at the page linked above, I see that much of the course and a few articles directly correlate to my professional background. I would like to sign on as a second OA to support the class. Out of respect, I wanted to contact you first. Do you think the class could use another OA? What are your thoughts? Cind.  amuse  (Cindy) 19:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hey Cindy! I wouldn't mind at all. I'm not sure yet if it can use another ambassador, but the more the merrier, especially if you're already involved in the topic! ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 20:05, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

Student from political participation class
Hi Ed, just a heads up... Julie from the Political Participation class contacted me regarding mentorship. I told her that you are the online ambassador of the class and would be mentoring the students in the class. Bejinhan talks   04:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Sounds good, thanks very much! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 07:56, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hey Ed, your page looks good, I'm trying to get on your level. Regards Stanleya3 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Armand! Good luck, and let me know if I can help anytime. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 15:08, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi Ed!

I checked out your page and it is one to be admired. I look forward to working with you this semester!

Thanks,

Juliejones24 (talk) 18:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)

Hi,

My name is Laura. I am currently working on the The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty article. I am working on this article as an assignment for my political science class. I am wondering if you will be my mentor?

Laura.Muro2 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC).

Hello Ed, my name is Winston I am a Political Science major at Southern Connecticut State University. The topic I will be working on deals with the American Gas Association. I was hoping you can be my mentor for this project; it would be very helpful to learn more abouth the basics and the fundementals on how to write a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winstonhry (talk • contribs) 19:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Hello everyone! I'm the online ambassador for your course, so ask me any specific questions you have and I'll do my best to answer them. Julie - me too! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 06:04, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

I am looking forward to working with you this semester Ed.

Bvandell22 (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)

I am wondering what should I do because my organization the National Union of Students Black Students' Campaign branched off the National Union of Students and the only information about the organization is on the website so im wondering what should i do? ive tried to contact ambassadors and everything and this project is beginning to confuse me. Ronald06514 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC).

The Signpost: 26 September 2011
Read this Signpost in full &middot; Single-page &middot; Unsubscribe &middot; EdwardsBot (talk) 02:36, 27 September 2011 (UTC)


 * Heh :) - Jarry1250 [Weasel? Discuss.] 20:03, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Update on courses and ambassador needs
Hello, Ambassadors!

I wanted to give you one last update on where we are this term, before my role as Online Facilitator wraps up at the end of this week. Already, there are over 800 students in U.S. classes who have signed up on course pages this term. About 40 classes are active, and we're expecting that many more again once all the classes are up and running.

On a personal note, it's been a huge honor to work with so many great Wikipedians over the last 15 months. Thanks so much to everyone who jumped in and decided to give the ambassador concept a try, and double thanks those of you who were involved early on. Your ideas and insights and enthusiasm have been the foundation of the program, and they will be the keys the future of the program.

Courses looking for Online Ambassadors
Still waiting to get involved with a class this term, or ready to take on more? We have seven classes that are already active and need OA support, and eleven more that have course pages started but don't have active students yet. Please consider joining one or more of these pods!

Active courses that really need Online Ambassadors:
 * Sociology of Poverty
 * Architectural Design
 * Introduction to Educational Psychology
 * Intro to Mass Communication
 * Psychology Seminar
 * Theories of the State
 * Advanced Media Studies

Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:


 * Housing and Social Policy
 * Anthropology, Wikipedia, and the Media
 * History & Systems
 * Horror Cinema
 * Digital Media... just bits in a box
 * Composition I
 * Telecommunications Management
 * Training Systems
 * Stigma: Culture, Deviance, Identity
 * Art and Terrorism
 * Political Violence and Insurgency

--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2011 (UTC)

Billy Hathorne
Nyttend (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I just added a second comment, which is much more weighty than the one that prompted the talkback. Nyttend (talk) 01:16, 28 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!

Discussions of our plans for the coming year will no doubt begin in the next few days. In the meantime, please make sure that you have the coordinators' discussion page on your watchlist, as most of the relevant activity happens there. If you have not already done so, you may want to read the relevant courses in the project academy, as well as the discussion page and its recent archives.

If you have any questions about your work as a coordinator, or anything else, please don't hesitate to ask me directly. Kirill [talk] [prof] 02:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kirill! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 02:32, 29 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks
Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks MisterBee, same goes to you. I'm looking forward to working with ya! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the compliment
I just noticed this and I wanted to tell you that I really appreciated what you said. Thank you. --John (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * I don't think I'm the only one who feels that way... compliments are given too seldom around here. Remind me to give them to you directly next time. ;-) You're quite welcome, and thanks for your edits to South American dreadnought race! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 08:13, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Any time, and if you ever want me to take a look at any article, just drop me a note. --John (talk) 15:17, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, and I will. I don't know how many articles I have left in me with the increased workload each new semester brings, but I'll probably ping you when I bring the dreadnought race article to FAC. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 18:00, 30 September 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations!
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy (talk) 22:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)