User talk:Aennulatw

Hi, I'm a new user.
 * I hope you enjoy editing!

Advice on article development
Hey Ktlynch, Thanks so much for all your help. I didn't even think of those examples you gave as being non-neutral when I read over the article earlier, but now I can definitely see how they could be be considered biased. All your tips and directions are really setting me on the right track...I'll let you know if I have any problems figuring out how to do any of the things in your list. Aennulatw (talk) 17:43, 14 March 2011 (UTC)
 * You're welcome! Some of my comments read like they were a little rushed, please do ask any questions you might have. Necessarily, you know more about the topic than me so the more material you add the more I can tinker, tweak, copyedit, criticise and praise. Though once it's relatively complete I'll do some comparative research to see if it's equal to the WP:A class standard. My earlier praise was sincere too: you have made a strong debut and I feel the article will be among the strongest of the newcomers to wikipedia, keep up the good work. Best wishes, --Ktlynch (talk) 02:02, 15 March 2011 (UTC)

Hello again, I was looking around on the web and found this website http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/Holmes_v._California_National_Guard. Either whoever wrote that article took that information verbatim off of my original stub, or whoever wrote the original body to my article plagiarized the entire thing. The url has "wiki" stuck somewhere in it, so I don't know if that means the site is connected to Wikipedia or what, but I just wanted to make sure the body of the article isn't plagiarized. Thanks for taking a look, Aennulatw (talk) 19:49, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes if you look at the bottom they admit as much. It seems they're just adding as much text and links as possible to their page to generate more search results, or for translation. Remember that all wikipedia contributions and articles are freely licensed, so what they are doing is perfectly legal. --Ktlynch (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Would this be considered a reliable source? http://caselaw.findlaw.com/us-9th-circuit/1203135.html Thanks, Aennulatw (talk) 20:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes, as far as I know that's a well known legal website. But look closer, that's a court report for the case. I think you already have it. Try searching in legal journals, LGBT commentators - the more academic the better--Ktlynch (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Sorry for sending so many messages at once, but I've been trying to find more information on the why and when Homles' commander asked him to clarify his sexuality and couldn't find anything at all.(3.The main body of the article should be more like a narrative. There's a gap between "Holmes's history in the national guard" and "Lead up to the case", which doesn't explain when or why Holmes's commander asked him to clarify his sexuality. This bit is in the lead section which should be a stand alone summary (see WP:LEAD)) Is it completely necessary to include in the article? I can see why it would be beneficial to include, but I really just can't find anything on it. Thanks again, Aennulatw (talk) 20:41, 21 March 2011 (UTC)


 * If you can't find anything after a genuine search then it's not a problem. It's just so readers can understand the series of events properly. As you seem to have grasped the article should draw people in, it should be readable to a generalist but also accurate.--Ktlynch (talk) 12:20, 22 March 2011 (UTC)

Holmes Vs National Guard - general comments
Hi Aennulatw,

Again congratulations on all your work on the article Holmes v. California National Guard. Of my mentees, you've easily done the most work, and grasped how to develop an article on a larger scale much quicker than most newcomers to wikipedia.

I just copy-edited it and noticed a few points:

1. You need to use inline citations WP:cite. Generally put these after a point of fact or interpretation which might be disputed, or any quotation or opinion from someone else. As a general rule, each section should have at least one.

2. Watch out for non-neutral language, there were lots of casual instances of opinion in the article. Try to avoid adjectives, I found words like "discrimination policy" dropped in without explanation. Another phrase said "Holmes was not promoted until March 1990" - expression like this implies his promotion was delayed for some reason. If it was say that and explain why.

3.The main body of the article should be more like a narrative. There's a gap between "Holmes's history in the national guard" and "Lead up to the case", which doesn't explain when or why Holmes's commander asked him to clarify his sexuality. This bit is in the lead section which should be a stand alone summary (see WP:LEAD)

4. Have a separate section explaining Holmes's first case in the district court.

5. Your sources are not clear. Add them to the bibliography at the end of the article.

I hope all is well and keep up the good work. I think you could take this article to WP:GA status in the future. Best, --Ktlynch (talk) 10:30, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Peer Review
This is a great article! It’s clear that you did a good deal of research and even further than that, condensed it into an understandable summary which is very hard to do. I have listed a few examples of places I think you can improve, and added some advice in smaller font underneath. I hope this helps, keep up the good work! Grammar: In some parts you capitalize all the first letters of “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” and other times you don’t; make sure whichever way you write it, it is uniform throughout. I changed all the variable forms of the name to capitals. Same issue with [Holmes’] vs. [Holmes’s] - I think they are both correct, but use the same grammar for each use. injunctive relief- for some reason Wiki says this is spelled wrong Consider Rephrasing: “…meaning he would never be called again to the reserve service.” –sounds awkward, consider rewording to something like “in other words, he would never again be permitted to serve in the reserves.” Something along those lines… ‘"Don't Ask, Don't Tell" (DADT) is a popular name for federal law, was enacted by the Congress of the United States in 1993, as a replacement to the policy held by the Department of Defense that simply discharged all homosexuals.” -I am confused about the point you are trying to make. I would split this up into 2 sentences, maybe fully explain what DADT means, and then go into when and why it was enacted. Expand “DADT was put into action as an effort to address the controversy over the varying sexual orientations of men and women serving in the military.” -What controversies? How did those controversies impair the military's system? “In June 1993, Holmes was notified that his commanding officer had issued a request to remove the First Lieutenant's federal recognition as a consequence of the statement acknowledging his homosexuality.” -What statement? Was it made by him or someone else? What was said? These would be interesting things to know, and would also give insight as to how delicate the statement was compared with how severe military took it. Maybe add a final closing statement at the very end, something like “Holmes was found guilty and never returned to the military”…or however his services ended

License tagging for File:AndrewHolmes.jpg
Thanks for uploading File:AndrewHolmes.jpg. You don't seem to have indicated the license status of the image. Wikipedia uses a set of image copyright tags to indicate this information; to add a tag to the image, select the appropriate tag from this list, click on this link, then click "Edit this page" and add the tag to the image's description. If there doesn't seem to be a suitable tag, the image is probably not appropriate for use on Wikipedia.

For help in choosing the correct tag, or for any other questions, leave a message on Media copyright questions. Thank you for your cooperation. --ImageTaggingBot (talk) 21:05, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 15:57, 21 August 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 00:37, 29 October 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 10:15, 21 December 2011 (UTC)

GOCE 2011 Year-End Report
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 05:48, 2 January 2012 (UTC)