User talk:Dana boomer/Archive 2

Uterine cancer
Hi, I noted you placed a short stub on this article. Uterine cancer being an ambiguos term can refer to a number of different cancers, each of which has already a more or less detailed article. Do you want these all duplicated? Ekem (talk) 19:58, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

red link recovery
Howdy. Firstly, thanks for helping out with the red link recovery project. I notice you've marked a few entries up, such as "Édith et Marcel links to Charles Gérard, try Charles Gerard - actor vs. dab page". Good job. Just wanted to suggest that it can be nice to add the near mis-spellings to these DAB pages; I'm pretty sure a lot of people would find the un-acceted DAB page while looking for the accented actor. Yes, I know this creates more red links, but they're useful ones! - TB (talk) 23:00, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

Whoo!
Here's a pretty new toy for your user page:

Ealdgyth - Talk 01:39, 8 June 2008 (UTC)

Assorted stuff
Hi Dana, I'm cool with what you did with Chamberlin and Budiasky (I think I DO need them, the content they linked may have been tossed, not sure). Keeps them for now, and I will figure out if I actually have stuff in the article that I sourced to them (Seems something about desert conditions and human domestication came from Budiasky).

Anyway, on another note, would you watchlist Mustang (horse) for me. Having some trouble with an editor who deleted a bunch of footnoted stuff, I got snarky about it, which didn't help, but may need another eye on the article to compare any diffs from my most recent edit, which was a sincere attempt to reconcile both versions. Thanks. Montanabw (talk) 21:49, 11 June 2008 (UTC)

Ahem...
Ahem. Note Kool Little Leo

Be my guest per tagging, I'm too chicken to take on the wrath of this editor with an RfD tag. Maybe we should initiate a conversation with her about appropriateness? She has been putting this horse's photo and freeze brand in a ton of articles, I've tossed it from some, kept it in others, but...well, look at contribs. I'm afraid I'll be too snarky and grumpy, but this is getting out of hand. Montanabw (talk) 23:02, 13 June 2008 (UTC)

Iranian horse
Hi Dana,

I see you've nominated this article for deletion with the comment "An unorganized compilation of uncited theory, myth, and random facts that can already be found in better, more organized articles". Isn't there one of these articles that this could be redirected to as an alternative to deletion? I usually get my daughter to help with horsey subjects but she's annoyed with me at the moment because I didn't have her dinner ready when she got home from work today. Phil Bridger (talk) 19:19, 25 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I'm hijacking Dana's page, Phil. The long story short is that there is no such breed.  It can't really be merged because it's such a mess.  There are articles on other horses that are mentioned in this one, but we can't redirect one article three different places.  It needs to just quietly go away.    Montanabw (talk) 03:40, 26 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Basically, ditto what Montana said. This isn't actually a breed...  The article is basically just saying that horses were domesticated a long time ago in the area that is now Iran (which is true, but not a fact worthy of its own article).  However, if you (or your daughter) have any suggestions on where it could be merged to, than please feel free to share them! Dana boomer (talk) 12:12, 26 June 2008 (UTC)

Another one where my diplomacy skills are failing me
Thanks for looking in on the Mustang article. I should have called for backup earlier, been spatting over that article for a while, but I think your presence is settling things down. Can you look in on another? Peruvian Paso. An IP editor who appears to have direct knowledge of the breed is trying to edit the article, I have been going in and toning down the "jump tall buildings and do magic" comments, fixing misspellings, and generally doing my wikifairy wordsmithing stuff, but we seem to be at an impasse over a cited sentence about the history of the breed -- they keep reverting a footnoted sentence I wrote about the historical background of Spanish gaited horses in general without explanation other than to accuse me of bias. I'm getting a little irritable. Need an outside eye. Montanabw (talk) 06:36, 27 June 2008 (UTC)

HEEELLLPPP!
Some overeager reviewer is trying to delist Horses in Warfare from GA. Some of their criticisms are accurate, but they are also just skewering the article and have posted something seeking community imput that has a feeding frenzy going over stupid things (they think horses shouldn't be measured in hands, for example). I am going to rip my hair out, because that was one of my first GAs, so I need HEELLLPPP! Calling for backup! Montanabw (talk) 03:26, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

The chocolate is yours!
Here you go! If you want the real thing, email me and we can negotiate! LOL! Montanabw (talk) 22:41, 17 July 2008 (UTC)

Done for a bit...
Okay, I've done my thing for a bit. Getting the Chamberlin sourced to page numbers has wiped me out for the day.. tag! You're it! Ealdgyth - Talk 20:16, 18 July 2008 (UTC)

Horses in warfare...
JUst a warning that I have a huge pile of journal articles I just pulled that may have sourcing/etc for the article. Hoping to get to work on them later this week. Some for Horse also! Ealdgyth - Talk 19:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Hello Dana - I am seriously disappointed that you would go and change all the Template:Cite book references that I have added to a personal style, and in doing so, rip out an enormous amount of information (publisher, publishing year, first name of author, author link...? What use does that have? Why do it? Especially when the in article (as opposed to in-edit window) appearance does have the same ordering as you seemingly preferred style? Ingolfson (talk) 08:23, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * I know the cite template is not a must, and I won't hit you over the head about using it - and if you feel that it breaks the flow in the edit window, we can use the wrapping version of the template - but I am seriously concerned that you remove information which is unobstrusive, to the point, and is presented in a format to improve Wikipedia-wide consistency.Ingolfson (talk) 08:31, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * The information is still there in the article, it's just that the bibliographical information like publisher, location, etc. is now located in the bibliography section. There is no required wikipedia-wide format, there are several systems in use (I can name three that I see regularly at FAC), and the general idea is to conform to the system already in use in the article. Horses in warfare is a GA, and the Equine wikiproject is pointing it towards FAC, so we need to keep the references consistent with the format already in use. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:00, 30 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Well, I missed the fact that that information had been kept at another location. Personally, I'd much rather have it together in one main list of references, but at least it is mostly retained, so I will shut up. Cheers. Ingolfson (talk) 21:24, 30 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for replying Ealdgyth, since I was offline for a while! Ingolfson, what I did was simply to follow the format that was in play for the rest of the article.  As Ealdgyth said, the information is still in the article, it has simply been moved down to the section called "References".  That way, we can use the short form for the in-text cites, and in so doing, make the notes section shorter and easier to read since there is no longer information repeated when the same book is used multiple times.  I hope my reply (and Ealdgyth's) answer your question and ease your frustration. Dana boomer (talk) 12:08, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Horses in warfare 2
Hi Dana, thanks for your note. I'd be happy to give the article another review and comment on it again (over the weekend at some point), but as for closing the review, I'm afraid that is out of my hands. Because I listed it as a community review to generate wider comment the GAR cannot be closed until consensus has formed, and then only by certain editors. If the article has improved enough (and this probably has) then that is just a formailty, but I can't perform it.--Jackyd101 (talk) 15:53, 8 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Hi, thanks for the note. I certainly will be giving a re-review of the article on the GAR, and from what I have seen of the changes to the article it will almost certainly recommend that the review is closed and the article kept. Unfortunately, as noted at the top of my talk page, I am extremely busy at the moment and simply haven't had time to perform a proper review (I had hoped to do it this weekend, but it just hasn't been possible). I object very strongly to Montanabw's hectoring tone and attitude; it is not my fault this article needed work and I really don't appreciate being accused of discoutesy and of making other editors do unneccessary work, objections I laid out on Montana's talk page and feel were perfectly justified. It has always been my intention to re-review the article and frankly, unpleasant comments on my talk page such as those left by Montana (not yours, which were perfectly polite) do not encourage me to make this a top priority. Hopefully I will get to this over the next couple of days. Regards--Jackyd101 (talk) 21:15, 10 August 2008 (UTC)


 * My reply elsewhere.  Montanabw (talk) 01:07, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

Horse murders article request for editors
Hello, all --

I realize that this is a distasteful subject to many in the horse field, especially among those with a love of show jumpers, but the John Edwards and Rielle Hunter affair currently in the news has opened up many, many questions on the subject of the late 20th century horse murders scandal. The reason for that, in case you don't know, is that Rielle Hunter was formerly Lisa Druck, whose father, James Druck, conspired to have her beloved show jumper Henry the Hawk electrocuted to collect the insurance money on him. This tragedy formed the background for a 1988 novel based on Lisa Druck's life, called Story of my Life by Jay McInerney. Later, in the early to mid 1990s, the actual horse killing scandal was exposed to the public through articles in the New York Times and Sports Illustrated, and then through a full-length book called "Hot Blood." An FBI investigation into the horse murders led to the conviction of a number of highly placed people in the show jumper and general equestrian sports world on charges of insurance fraud.

When Rielle Hunter's background was probed, due to her affair with John Edwards, it turned out that she and her horse were prominent victims of the horse murder insurance scam, and her own father was one of the orchestrators of the criminal activities. But in trying to link this information up to her bio article, it turned up that there wss no article on the subject of the horse murders at Wikipedia, doubtless because the scandal occured before the development of the world wide web. An article was just created today, but it is not comprehensive in scope and needs to be expanded greatly lest it be deleted. There is an article on the murder of the millionairess Helen Brach whose death, in 1977, was also connected to the horse murders scandal, and it too could use improvement.

I am looking for a few good editors who have the brackground to write the horse murders article, and to link it to the Helen Brach murder, show jumping, and Rielle Hunter articles. No need to reply to me -- if you are interested, you know what to do. I will try to help, also, as best i can, but the topic is far from my usual field of writing, and i would prefer to see it handled by those with the greatest depth of knowledge on the subject.

If you need sources to cite, you can find the best of them at the Rielle Hunter page in the section on her early life and family. Here are two more:

[New York Times, On Killing Horses for Money: A Craftsman's Dirty Secrets, by Don Terry, Published: September 5, 1993]

[New York Times, Horse Show; Equestrians Facing Competition and Lingering Scandal, by Robin Finn, Published: October 30, 1995]

I am posting this identical request to a number of horse-rleated talk pages, so you may see it more than once, for which i apologize in advance.

Sincerely, catherine yronwode Catherineyronwode (talk) 02:52, 15 August 2008 (UTC)

Go Haflingers!
I made some tweaks to Haflinger per the GA reviewer's comments. In the process ran across some stuff to add/tweak/rearrange. Hope I didn't screw up anything. (It IS interesting when one is not lead editor but trying to fix reviewer comments. I felt far less snarky and defensive tweaking someone else's work!  Whazzup wit' dat?  LOL!  :-D  )  If the coat of arms image doesn't work for the article, feel free to toss, but I thought it was cute. Anyway, you sure did a great job bringing that article up to a very nice standard and I'm seriously impressed! Let's hope it goes GA!  Montanabw (talk) 23:45, 17 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Congrats my dear! Hooray for you!   Montanabw (talk)

Tropical Storm Alpha (2005)
I have addressed your concerns as best as I can. You can find my replies on the GA review page, where more feedback is always welcome. Thanks for giving it such a through review – I am not used to this level of detail in a GA review but I think it will prepare the article well for an eventual FAC.  Plasticup  T / C  02:22, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter
Sorry about the delay. AWB has been having a few issues lately. Here is the august issue of the WikiProject Good Articles Newsletter! Dr. Cash (talk) 20:29, 19 August 2008 (UTC)

2008 Tanana Valley flood GAN
I've made the corrections you suggested. If there's anything else I need to do, don't hesitate to ask. I appreciate the time you've taken to review the article and would like to say thanks for doing that. JKBrooks85 (talk) 22:16, 19 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that; I'd thought I addressed everything. I've added a citation to that spot and added another in the Nenana section. Thanks again. JKBrooks85 (talk) 09:13, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Basil W. Duke
I did most of what you suggested to Basil W. Duke, except there were two things I couldn't figure out how best to fix them.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace  05:05, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

That passage was split and placed where they seemed best used. I think it's ready for your final approval.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace  14:11, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Nanbu clan
Thanks for your review of the article, please see my comment here. Cheers, Tadakuni (talk) 20:02, 20 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, I have replied here. -Tadakuni (talk) 20:52, 20 August 2008 (UTC)

Geology of Somerset
Further to your GA review comments on Geology of Somerset a lot of work has been done on the areas you identified. I would be grateful if you would take another look and let us know if there are further areas of development you feel are required.&mdash; Rod talk 21:09, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thanks for your comments & suggestions for further improvement.&mdash; Rod talk 14:36, 22 August 2008 (UTC)

Hurricane Karl review
Hi there Dana! I've addressed the issues you mentioned on the GAN review page for Hurricane Karl (2004). I don't really agree with your last note about moving the article's image, as it's normal for the TC Wikiproject's articles to have the storm track where it originally was, but I've left comments on the review page and we can discuss it there if needed. Thanks so much for reviewing the article, I appreciate it. :-)  Jamie ☆ S93  16:51, 23 August 2008 (UTC)

Irrigation in Peru
Done. Thanks for your humble opinion. ;) Intothewoods29 (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Thank you Dana for your comments. It is indeed based on your comments that I have worked on improving the Siege of Bangkok article. I will try to address some of the remaining points you have mentionned. Thanks for the suggestions, and thank you for your interest! Cheers PHG (talk) 16:42, 25 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the cleanup of named refs! PHG (talk) 19:15, 26 August 2008 (UTC)

Thomas Hines
I fixed all the problems about Thomas Hines, or at least explained the problems. Feel free to look again. Thanks.-- King Bedford I Seek his grace  20:27, 25 August 2008 (UTC)

Katyusha
Hey, thanks for the post-mortem Katyusha review. I plan to go through your list and address all of the suggestions. I don't mind if the article is re-reviewed and demoted, as I welcome the constructive criticism and plan to eventually go for A-class review anyway. Regards. —Michael Z. 2008-08-27 00:19 z 

Crown (dentistry), whoops!
Eek! I quickfailed the article's GAC nom just as you signed on to review it. If you think the fail was incorrect and/or premature, please feel free to revert me. Otherwise, well, I suppose we can remove it from the list? María ( habla con migo ) 19:39, 28 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Awesome, thanks for the extra insight. The nom seemed to come from a random, drive-by editor, and after a few bad experiences (hours of my life wasted on lengthy reviews that amount to nothing...) I guess I've become somewhat weary of long-winded reviews for articles with no major contributor in sight.  Hopefully your spot-on suggestions will help someone who has a thing for dentistry!  María ( habla  con migo ) 19:46, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

36th Engineer Brigade (United States)
I've been quick to fix the issues you had with this GA, what do you think about it now? - Ed! (talk) (Hall of Fame)  19:41, 28 August 2008 (UTC)

New toy for us...
Footnotes. I'm going to go implement it in Thoroughbred right now... Ealdgyth - Talk 15:03, 29 August 2008 (UTC)


 * I like it! And sorry I have been so out of it, everyone.  I really am up to my ears in real life, I'm trying to stay in touch, maybe email me if there's a crisis.   Montanabw (talk) 19:46, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Hugh Trenchard
Thanks for your helpful and specific remarks on the GA review. I have been attempting to take action on them. As I will be away from the Wikipedia for a couple of days, there will be a hiatus. However, I will carry on when I get back. I have left comments on the need for publishers in refs on the GA review page and I have a general question about short and long references, namely - Do you suggest that each short ref should link to a full ref as is currently the case for Boyle and Lyall? If not, then anyone wanting to check out a ref my find it difficult as surname alone is not that precise. Greenshed (talk) 00:02, 30 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Replying on the review page. Dana boomer (talk) 22:08, 30 August 2008 (UTC)

Thanks for all your input so far. Do you know what one should do when faced with a book reference from which the editor is known but the actual author of the cited text is not known? How should this be presented as a short ref? Many thanks. Greenshed (talk) 07:30, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Invitation to my sandbox
Hi Dana,

I have a sandbox, User:Montanabw/Sandbox that I am using to rough out a general article on riding. And I'm inviting my friends to play! I want it to supplement the Equestrianism article, not be overly how-to, incorporate a history of equestrianism, outline some very general principles common to all riding, and then spin off links to all the zillions of riding style and detail articles. In some ways, this maybe should be what the equestrianism article should have done (that article was originally titled "horseback riding") but whatever the sandbox article gets named if it ever goes live, it will be very different in content from the current equestrianism article, which is more an overview of the style stuff. Anyway, drop in and either comment or add something, or organize something, or whatever! I'm sort of stuck and don't quite know where to go with it. Montanabw (talk) 08:06, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Siege of Bangkok
Hi Dana. User:Erachima close the nomination for Siege of Bangkok:. I think I have actually answered to basically all the issues you raised during the last two weeks. Is there anything else I can do to help? Cheers PHG (talk) 10:31, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the hint about referencing the end of paragraph. I learned something: this is not something I would systematically do. Do you see anything else? Cheers PHG (talk) 16:20, 31 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Hi Dana. Thank you for your message. I am not a native english speaker, so clearly I will need your help for prose and flow :) I'll do my best for the intro and the ref naming. Cheers PHG (talk) 16:44, 31 August 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Just wanted to say thank you for weighing in on the wikiquette issue! It deserves a barnstar! (and you are right about stuff, too!)   Montanabw (talk) 04:08, 1 September 2008 (UTC)

(Moved barnstar to user page)

USS Nevada (BB-36)
I believe that I fixed everything...?  the_ed 17  02:10, 2 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I believe that now everything is fixed....Thanks for reviewing the article!  the_ed 17  20:25, 2 September 2008 (UTC)

Replies...
...can be found here. =)  the_ed 17  21:14, 3 September 2008 (UTC)


 * One last reply!!!! Thanks...  the_ed 17  21:29, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

You don't mind...
...when I add stuff like this to your reviews, right? If you do, I'll stop... =/  the_ed 17  18:38, 4 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Ok...I just wanted to make sure that you didn't think that I was undercutting you or anything. I'm just interested in military related things, so I always take a look at the War and Military articles when I see one pass/fail on my watchlist...So anyway, thanks.  the_ed 17  18:48, 4 September 2008 (UTC)

RE: Op Luttich
Hey, thanks for the review of Operation Luttich. I think I've addressed most of the issues brought up in the review. Thanks for your help in bringing this article up the assessment-scale! Cam (Chat) 04:27, 6 September 2008 (UTC)

Coronation GA review
Thanks so much for taking time to read and critique the Coronation article. Might I ask you to check out my responses to the issues you raised, specifically the questions I asked about images? I have a couple of days off, so I'm going to work on the rest of the issues you raised; may I get back with you afterwards to solicit your opinion on the changes? Thanks again for your review, and your suggestions! - Ecjmartin (talk) 01:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)
 * I've done quite a bit of work on the coronation article, in conjunction with Prince of Canada; might I ask you to take another look and tell me if your specific objections were satisfactorily answered, before I renominate it? PofC is still working on some of the citation templates, but I would like to solicit your opinion on the article itself; specifically the objections you raised and whether you feel I have addressed them.  If you can't, it's no problem; I just thought I'd ask.  Thanks! - Ecjmartin (talk) 00:21, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

GA review... begging
Hi there. I've seen your excellent GA reviews around a few places.. I put Canadian heraldry up for GA, but not many people seem interested in reviewing royalty/nobility/heraldry articles. I was wondering if I could prevail upon you to cast your critical eye over the article?

Thanks!

Prince of Canadat 17:52, 7 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review. I am currently deciding whether or not to leave the project due to severe bullying from another editor.  If I stay, I will implement your suggestions. Prince of Canadat 19:25, 9 September 2008 (UTC)


 * I've been busy, and would appreciate you leaving the article 'on hold' rather than 'failed'. Thank you. I will be able to handle it sometime in the next couple of days, and it would be silly to go through the whole GA process again. Prince of Canadat 14:04, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military History Invitation
I noticed that you've conducted a number of GA-class reviews lately on WikiProject Military history-related articles... I was wondering if you might be willing to join the project and bring that experience with you to the review department? I'm sure you could be a big help! Either way, thanks for your efforts.  bahamut0013 ♠  ♣   16:18, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Puerto Rican Campaign
Issues have been taken care of. Thank you for reviewing the article. Tony the Marine (talk) 23:04, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Welcome!
 Hi, and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:


 * Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
 * The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can [ watchlist it] if you're interested; or, you can add it directly to your user page by including WPMILHIST Announcements there.
 * Most important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you [ watchlist it].
 * The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, article logistics, and other tasks.
 * We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
 * We've developed a style guide that covers article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
 * If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts and copy-editing alerts.
 * The project has a stress hotline available for your use.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask one of the project coordinators, or any experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome! We look forward to seeing you around! Eurocopter (talk) 18:24, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

GAN
Well, kinda...the other three are my noms... =/  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  18:35, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No prob, reviewing is (kinda) fun! And the lengths are not my fault...that'd be the creators', User:Marcd30319. =D I'll jump on that review after this class.  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  19:27, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * And stop passing Bellhalla's GA noms!!! He's going to win the bloody contest again!!! =(  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  19:29, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Lol, I wasn't actually annoyed... That guy likes his WWI-era cargo ships!  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  20:20, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * By the way, when you are done with the GA review, will you notify the creator, Marcd30319 (talk)? Thanks and cheers,  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  20:42, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * ...So I probably should have looked over Triton a wee but more before I nominated it, eh? Sorry....Anyway, don't worry too much, Operation Strikeback (if you choose to undertake that mission) is a lot better.  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  22:53, 9 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Would you take a look at it again? He removed all of the message board postings...  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  13:48, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * No problem*mdash;I saw that you were going to be gone. Whenever you get to it!  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  13:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Thank you
Not only are you a great reviewer, but you're also a great contributor! Tony the Marine (talk) 19:17, 9 September 2008 (UTC)

(Moved image to user page)

re: RTÉ
Thanks for the feedback on the rte article, sometimes its difficult to know what to do on this site, but now there's some guidelines for improvement which are much appreciated. howth575 (talk) 09:23, 12 September 2008 (UTC)

Mount Edziza volcanic complex GAN
Thanks for notifying me. I have followed the necessary procedures, and passed this article as a GA. Good luck with your work on the Horse article. -- Jor dan  Contribs  12:38, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

You want a fun GAN?
...try Jimmy Wales... I believe that I saw his name at the bottom there...yep, that I did. =D  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  20:20, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Yeeeeaaaaah NO. Well, maybe. But not now. =D That's just plain scary to undertake! Anyway, I'll get to the '"Triton ASAP after dinner, methinks...we'll see. I'm stuck back in my Shannara realm for the moment because I read The Elves of Cintra two days ago... =/  -talk- the_ed17  -contribs-  20:27, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

Military history WikiProject coordinator election
The September 2008 Military history WikiProject coordinator election has begun. We will be selecting nine coordinators to serve for the next six months from a pool of fourteen candidates. Please vote here by September 30! This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 21:37, 15 September 2008 (UTC)

FIY
User talk:SandyGeorgia

Don't know if you caught it...
But I went through and put the new "ref group" syntax in Appaloosa. We should start using this for those explanatory footnotes that Montana's so fond of writing. It's very handy and much neater than mixing the types of footnotes together. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:37, 30 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Hey! I haven't done an explanatory footnote in ages!  I just gave y'all the idea and now you do them too!  LOL!  That said, splitting them out works really well, so thanks for that!   Montanabw (talk) 22:25, 30 September 2008 (UTC)