User talk:Coemgenus/archive2013-2

File:Lamberth.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Lamberth.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 16:03, 1 July 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 July newsletter
We're halfway through this year's penultimate round, and the competition is moving along well. Pool A's currently leads overall, while Pool B's  is second. Both leaders are WikiCup veterans, and both have already scored over 600 points this month. If the round were to end today,, with 274 points, would be the lowest-scoring participant to make it through. This indicates that participants will need a score comparable to last year's (573, the highest ever) to qualify for the final. The high scores this year are a testament both to the quality of participants and to the increased focus on significant content (eligible for bonus points) in this year's competition. So far this round, both Sasata and have made up over half of their score through bonus points, with, for example, high importance FA koala earning Sasata a total of 440 points (from a multiplier of 4.4) and high-importance GA sea earning Cwmhiraeth a total of 216 points (from a multiplier of 7.2). Other articles on important topics submitted this round include a featured article on the Norman conquest of England by, and good articles on Nobel laureate in literature Henryk Sienkiewicz, Nobel laureate in physics Hans Bethe, and the noted Japanese aircraft carrier Hiryū. These articles are by, and Sturmvogel_66 respectively.

Other than that, there is not much to report! If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 23:19, 31 July 2013 (UTC)

DYK RfC

 * As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat&#124;Contributions 03:05, 1 August 2013 (UTC)

WP:FOUR RFC
There are two WP:RFCs at WP:FOUR. The first is to conflate issues so as to keep people from expressing meaningful opinions. The second, by me, is claimed to be less than neutral by proponents of the first. Please look at the second one, which I think is much better.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 06:19, 20 August 2013 (UTC)

Nevertheless
Oh man, how many times have I gone back over a paragraph etc. of my own, and thought "you really had that word on the brain!" So I feel your pain; nevertheless, my congratulations to your hard work on CAA, and while I am at it, it is people like you who have given me the confidence to even dare to touch an FA article with the expectation I might be improving it.Hoppyh (talk) 18:27, 25 August 2013 (UTC)
 * I have done alot of work on Grant, but not since early 2012. Hoppyh (talk) 01:10, 28 August 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 August newsletter
This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:
 * , a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
 * , another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
 * , 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
 * , a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
 * , the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
 * , who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
 * , a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
 * 1) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final:, , , , , , ,. Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:24, 29 August 2013 (UTC)

Andrew Johnson edits
I looked up and included the additional references to Andrew Johnson's pre-Civil War militia service because when I first included it, I was questioned for using only one source -- the Trefousse biography. By including the citation for the receipt for payment of a fine related to his militia service from Johnson's own papers, I rebutted the notion that "OK, maybe AN Andrew Johnson served in the Tennessee Militia, but how do we know it was THE Andrew Johnson?" By including citations showing that others, including James Polk, addressed Johnson as "Colonel Johnson" in their letters to him and about him beginning in the early 1840s, I demonstrated that there was more than one source (Treffouse) for this fact, further enhancing its credibility.

I'm still attempting to locate the information on Johnson's commission as a colonel -- whether it was as commander of a regiment, if it came as the result of an election of militia members, if it was an appointment on the governor's staff, etc. If I can find those details, I'll add them to the Wikipedia page.

I still think it's worth considering whether the citations I included previously enhance the article. I think they do. What do you think? is it worth restoring them?

Billmckern (talk) 17:02, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * For an article about a president, there are usually enough scholarly biographies to avoid having to dig into more obscure sources. I think what you wrote is substantiated in Trefousse. I own that book, and looked up Johnson's militia service just now. It's as you say. --Coemgenus (talk) 20:33, 12 September 2013 (UTC)


 * I'll defer. I'm going to continue researching the source of Johnson's colonel's commission, and will update his page when I find it.Billmckern (talk) 12:20, 13 September 2013 (UTC)


 * Sounds good. Trefousse is a bit vague about it.  I'd certainly like to know more.  --Coemgenus (talk) 12:25, 13 September 2013 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/Tadeusz Kościuszko/archive1
Thank you for your review; I hope you were not discouraged by some unfortunate choice of words by another editor. The section has been shortened; is it more acceptable now? --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 04:10, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * I'll take a look. The article's very good.  Gwillhickers and I have butted heads in the past, and I try to keep the peace by avoiding dealing with him.  Nothing against you, I think you do fine work here.  --Coemgenus (talk) 12:23, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

Precious again
  US presidents

Thank you for quality articles on US presidents, such as William McKinley, and on history, such as 68th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment, and for fighting "useless verbiage", - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:39, 14 September 2012 (UTC) A year ago, you were the 244th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, repeated in br'erly style, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:44, 14 September 2013 (UTC)
 * Thank you! --Coemgenus (talk) 12:21, 14 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for John Sherman
The DYK project (nominate) 16:02, 18 September 2013 (UTC)

DYK for Barnabas Burns
The DYK project (nominate) 16:07, 19 September 2013 (UTC)

Barnabas Burns
I'm confused. You say his wife's name is one thing, but reference a source that says it is another. If sentence says his wife was named Urath, why doesn't that sentence have a reference backing that up. Perhaps a reference to ancestry.com?

Roseohioresident (talk) 17:10, 20 September 2013 (UTC)


 * The first source I found on Burns (Baughman) says "Writh". Every other source I saw says "Urath". I'll cite one of them when I get home tonight, but google Urath Gore to see what I mean.  --Coemgenus (talk) 17:22, 20 September 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for September 26
Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Ulysses S. Grant, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Redeemer (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:47, 26 September 2013 (UTC)

WikiCup 2013 September newsletter
In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. , —who has never participated in the competition before—and follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to reduce the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:47, 1 October 2013 (UTC)

Talk:Bradley Manning/October 2013 move request
Greetings. Because you participated in the August 2013 move request regarding this subject, you may be interested in participating in the current discussion. This notice is provided pursuant to Canvassing. Cheers! bd2412 T 21:27, 4 October 2013 (UTC)

Last will and testament of Tadeusz Kościuszko
You may be interested in this new article I've created. The intention is to reduce the coverage of this topic in TK article, while expanding it in this dedicated article. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus&#124; reply here 07:12, 5 October 2013 (UTC)

Million Awards
Looking at your user page after your comment at WT:GAN, I realized we owe you some Million Awards! This may not be a complete set of the bling you deserve, but I did want to offer thanks for your terrific work on US Presidents.

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display these userboxes:

If you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it! Cheers, -- Khazar2 (talk) 14:41, 7 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Cool, thanks! --Coemgenus (talk) 15:04, 7 October 2013 (UTC)

An apology Grant talk page
Hello Coemgenus. I apologize for any statements I made on the Grant talk page that you viewed implied directly or indirectly that "bad faith" edits were made on your part. Any issues I had were with the McFeely (1981) source, not yourself. I have given an explanation on the Grant talk page. I encourage you to continue editing on Grant. Your editing skills are needed on the Grant article and the edits you have already made have vastly contributed to that Grant article getting to GA and FA status. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:58, 12 October 2013 (UTC)


 * It's cool. We both got a little overheated. Like the General said, let us have peace. --Coemgenus (talk) 19:13, 12 October 2013 (UTC)

Well done
Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of John Sherman to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,335 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk 10:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Hayden English
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article William Hayden English you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 00:40, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Hayden English
The article William Hayden English you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:William Hayden English for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 13:30, 16 October 2013 (UTC)


 * Just out of curiosity, what motivated you to pick the 1880 election as a particular focus? Whatever it was, thanks for the great contributions it's generating. Cheers, Khazar2 (talk) 16:50, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Thanks! 1880 just kept coming up as I wrote about people who interested me. I thought it would be nice to tie it all together. I'm glad you've enjoyed what I've written so far. --Coemgenus (talk) 17:02, 16 October 2013 (UTC)
 * I just read Candice Millard's Destiny of the Republic a few months ago, as it happens, about Garfield's life and assassination. It's a shame the US missed out on having him for a president for a full term; he was quite a man. -- Khazar2 (talk) 17:43, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Hayden English
The article William Hayden English you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:William Hayden English for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Khazar2 -- 16:52, 16 October 2013 (UTC)

Thomas Babington Macaulay
Yes Im still in.I was inactive as we were celebrating Durga puja.I apologise for it.RRD13 (talk) 14:44, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * No problem, just making sure. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:55, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
 * Hello,I have addressed all your points there.RRD13 (talk) 05:52, 1 November 2013 (UTC)
 * OK, I'll take a look this weekend. At first glance, it looks much improved. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:29, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Grant General of the Army
I do not understand why this is too specific. The source you provide to the General of the Army is Wikipedia's article which fails to produce the legislation or subsequent General Order which actually explains Grant's important office in detail. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Stas.klos (talk • contribs) 14:43, 24 October 2013 (UTC)


 * What I mean is: Grant's salary for the last four years of his army career is a minor detail that is way too specific for a general article about the man's entire life. I suppose if you were writing an entire book about the man it might be worth mentioning, but none of the authors of the four Grant biographies I've read saw fit to include it.  --Coemgenus (talk) 15:00, 24 October 2013 (UTC)

Books and Bytes: The Wikipedia Library Newsletter
Books and Bytes Volume 1, Issue 1, October 2013 by , Greetings Wikipedia Library members! Welcome to the inaugural edition of Books and Bytes, TWL’s monthly newsletter. We're sending you the first edition of this opt-in newsletter, because you signed up, or applied for a free research account: HighBeam, Credo, Questia, JSTOR, or Cochrane. To receive future updates of Books and Bytes, please add your name to the subscriber's list. There's lots of news this month for the Wikipedia Library, including new accounts, upcoming events, and new ways to get involved... New positions: Sign up to be a Wikipedia Visiting Scholar, or a Volunteer Wikipedia Librarian Wikipedia Loves Libraries: Off to a roaring start this fall in the United States: 29 events are planned or have been hosted. New subscription donations: Cochrane round 2; HighBeam round 8; Questia round 4... Can we partner with NY Times and Lexis-Nexis?? New ideas: OCLC innovations in the works; VisualEditor Reference Dialog Workshop; a photo contest idea emerges News from the library world: Wikipedian joins the National Archives full time; the Getty Museum releases 4,500 images; CERN goes CC-BY Announcing WikiProject Open: WikiProject Open kicked off in October, with several brainstorming and co-working sessions New ways to get involved: Visiting scholar requirements; subject guides; room for library expansion and exploration Read the full newsletter ''Thanks for reading! All future newsletters will be opt-in only. Have an item for the next issue? Leave a note for the editor on the Suggestions page. --The Interior 21:15, 27 October 2013 (UTC)''

WikiCup 2013 October newsletter
The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is. Our final nine were as follows:

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:


 * wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
 * wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
 * wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
 * wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
 * wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
 * wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
 * wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
 * wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
 * wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
 * The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to, for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
 * Finally, the judges are awarding the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:24, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

For future reference
I'm happy to restore images for any featured article candidate that has images of sufficient size to restore. It looks like 6 images from John Sherman are available from the Library of Congress. I'll set to work on as many of them prove practical. Adam Cuerden (talk) 06:54, 1 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you! I'll leave you a note before I nominate my next article, if there's any similar images. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:19, 1 November 2013 (UTC)

Attention talk page stalkers
I'm not sure I have any talk page stalkers, but if you exist and you feel like doing a featured article candidate review, I would appreciate your input on William Hayden English. Thanks. Coemgenus (talk) 16:06, 26 November 2013 (UTC)

Barnstar of Cooperation
Thanks, it's a labor of love. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:57, 27 November 2013 (UTC)

GAN December 2013 Backlog Drive
{| |}

December 2013
Please do not add or change content, as you did to George W. Washington, without verifying it by citing a reliable source. Please review the guidelines at Citing sources and take this opportunity to add references to the article. Thank you. Your Friendly Neigborhood Wikipedian (talk) 18:52, 3 December 2013 (UTC)


 * Did you see what was there before I changed it? It was an incorrect redirect that no one used. What I put is better, and it is certainly not a BLP, which is how you tagged it. If you want to improve it, you might search for the source you think it needs, rather than spamming it (and my talk page) with templates. --Coemgenus (talk) 19:00, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ulysses S. Grant
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ulysses S. Grant you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 20:11, 8 December 2013 (UTC)

The Wikipedia Library Survey
As a subscriber to one of The Wikipedia Library's programs, we'd like to hear your thoughts about future donations and project activities in this brief survey. Thanks and cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 15:31, 9 December 2013 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 19:56, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ulysses S. Grant
The article Ulysses S. Grant you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold. The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Ulysses S. Grant for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 23:31, 10 December 2013 (UTC)

File:Lamberth.jpg missing description details
Dear uploader: The media file you uploaded as: is missing a description and/or other details on its image description page. If possible, please add this information. This will help other editors make better use of the image, and it will be more informative to readers.
 * File:Lamberth.jpg

If you have any questions, please see Help:Image page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 04:39, 11 December 2013 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ulysses S. Grant
The article Ulysses S. Grant you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ulysses S. Grant for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Quadell -- 14:12, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Ulysses S Grant
Thanks for your editing contributions Coemgenus in getting the Ulysses S Grant to good article status. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC)
 * Right back at you. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:29, 12 December 2013 (UTC)

Million Award
The Million Award is an initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

John Lane Gardner deletion
Come to Articles for deletion/John Lane Gardner if you have an opinion. Congrats on your NYT mention. Do you participate in the Flickr Commons/Library of Congress project to add context to their images from the Bain collection? I just added 100 images from there to Flickr Commons. Peek at my user page for this past months articles I created based on those photos. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 18:41, 22 December 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!
Hello Coemgenus, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition will begin at midnight tonight (UTC). There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! , and  17:32, 31 December 2013 (UTC)