User talk:Dank/Archive 16

WP:CL shortcut
I'm not sure if changing the redirect is something I should be discussing with you specifically or on Wikipedia talk:Clerking, so I've decided to err on the side of populism and post there. (I haven't composed it yet; I want to understand the context better, which will take me a few minutes.) --Pi zero (talk) 15:40, 2 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Nod, I already replied at your wikiproject. It may be moot, we'll know within a month, and even better, if you can get some interest going in that wikiproject, that would be great. - Dank (push to talk) 15:43, 2 September 2010 (UTC)

Hood
Dan, Do you think that the Hood article is ready for GAN? I know it needs much more work before I submit it even for ACR, but I'm a little too close to judge for myself if the article holds up as a coherent narrative without any obvious gaps suitable for GA.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:33, 4 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's complete enough, might as well try it. - Dank (push to talk) 19:09, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Rivadavia class battleship
Thanks for all your help with the FAC, it's really appreciated. :-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 04:19, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I enjoyed it, although I have to admit I enjoy A-class reviews more :) - Dank (push to talk) 04:23, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

Bodenplatte
Thanks for helping, it isn't going unnoticed. I've managed to cut the article from 104kb to 77kb with help from the eagle-eyed Jim Sweeney. I don't think I can do much more without losing information that is useful. I have done a few GA articles (aircraft/ one battle/ and flying aces) that are above 80 (one is 121km which is A-Class) and they seemed to make it through. I think the subject demands a reasonable length. At the moment it is around 74kb without biblio' and refs. What do you think? Dapi89 (talk) 14:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Outside of my own wikiprojects (main WP:SHIPS), I don't have a lot of opinions, I'm mainly trying to help the backlog at WP:GAN by nudging articles into better compliance with WP:LEAD, WP:LAYOUT and WP:WORDS. Jim Sweeney is a great MILHIST copyeditor, btw. - Dank (push to talk) 16:39, 6 September 2010 (UTC)

World Science Festival
nominated World Science Festival for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Delist" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. Nageh (talk) 20:39, 8 September 2010 (UTC)

DC Meetup #12
An off-wiki discussion is taking place concerning DC Meetup #12. Watch this page for announcements.

—NBahn (talk) 04:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)

P.S. You are receiving this message either because you received a similar one before and didn't object, or you requested to receive a similar one in the future. If you don't wish to receive this message again, then please let me know either on my talk page or here.

Holding pen again
Hi Dank, I'm coming here, because you were the admin commenting on VictoriaUniversity and RyecartPictures; the reporting user didn't answer your questions; however, I'm not entirely sure those two usernames are kosher, so I'd rather let you make the final call. Salvio Let's talk 'bout it! 23:49, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like Beebs has declined to block, and I'm fine with that. No connection was ever made to the names, and both have stopped editing.  Thanks for your work. - Dank (push to talk) 01:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks!
 * I was waiting to see what's the take of the community, regarding the clerkship idea, before trying to run; but I'm not really seeing much participation, sadly... By the way, how did your lightning talk go? Salvio  Let's talk 'bout it! 02:20, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure what's going on. If people do want clerkship (they seemed to) but they don't want to spend much time voting, then the solution is probably to do as we've done in MILHIST and only vote on clerks every 6 or 12 months.
 * My talk was well-received; 4 people gave feedback afterwards (agreeing with me, and bringing up a point that I forgot to bring up, that clerkship may fail if it's seen as a "tier" underneath adminship; it should be its own thing). Sue Gardner mentioned some statistics from my talk in her keynote the next day.
 * Synopsis: we have about 800 active admins, and roughly 600 of those began their wiki-careers in 2004-2006; 9 began in 2009, and 29 began in 2008. So it's more likely that we'll lose 200 active admins and gain 9 next year than the other way around.  No specific proposal for dealing with the problem at WT:RFA has gotten even majority support.  One proposal that's gotten strong support so far [although we seem to have trouble gathering voters!] is "clerkship", a "social" solution to the problem: that is, we want to elect clerks, which will empower the best patrollers and give them the visible support of the community for taking over some of the jobs that admins have typically done.  And it's the only solution that's currently working, that is, there's been an uptick in the quality and quantity of reports and comments on reports by non-admins since the idea was floated. - Dank (push to talk) 03:03, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I agree with you that clerkship might be a partial solution to the constantly decreasing number of admins — just as the vandal fighter thing might have, had it not been shot down right off the bat... —, and it could help people who'd like to run for adminship to show they know their way around UAA; and, quite honestly, I think clerks are generally doing a good job... However, as you say, nobody seems to want to !vote or even leave their feedback, for that matter; so, perhaps, the MILHIST solution is the way to go, for the moment... Salvio  Let's talk 'bout it! 23:54, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

The Texas Chain Saw Massacre

 * Thanks much! - Dank (push to talk) 18:55, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Haruna
Glad to help. The article is interesting, and I enjoyed reading it. Thanks for filling me in a bit on how your group works; I wondered why some details had been attended to and others not, but I doubted that they were simply being ignored. I have a watch on the review page. Finetooth (talk) 20:42, 11 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Great. A question about SMS Goeben: "A total of thirteen men were killed and three were wounded."  13 and three?  13 and 3? - Dank (push to talk) 20:48, 11 September 2010 (UTC)

Aero Club
Can you send me a copy of the content of the article, I think it used to be a list of Aero Club's with Wikipedia articles. --Richard Arthur Norton (1958- ) (talk) 03:10, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Done. - Dank (push to talk) 03:17, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

SMS Goeben
Sorry, I didn't mean to get in your way there. I'm done for now and good edits. --John (talk) 05:24, 12 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, you too. I tend to make small edits at FAC with comments for other copyeditors, so it's rare that I can't save, and not a problem when I can't. - Dank (push to talk) 14:08, 12 September 2010 (UTC)

Hiya
Hi Dank, I used MDB to deliver the messages to the Users and Admins that were active in some way on UAA in the last month. With Clerkship would you like me to create a substitutable template notifying candidates of their election status? Right now I'd like to know the direction the elections are headed in. Thanks,  Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм &#124;  Champagne?  10:46, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It seems to me things are confused at the moment; I'd like to see more discussion of whether we want to vote on all the clerks at once or one by one before I support bot notifications. - Dank (push to talk) 12:03, 14 September 2010 (UTC)

mentoring
Hey, Dank. Are you still wanting to do general ambassador assistance without being a mentor to individual students? If so, we should move your entry to the bottom section on Online Ambassadors/Mentors.--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 14:45, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You hit me on a bad day, I'm feeling like I'll never get my wiki-work done. Let me take another couple of days ... if I'm still feeling snowed under, I'll move my entry down.  It's nice to be needed and to have work to do but ... man. - Dank (push to talk) 15:00, 14 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It looks like I don't have that much time, I removed myself from the page. Thanks for the heads-up. - Dank (push to talk) 13:31, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry to hear that, but I know how it feels to be snowed under. Feel free to sign up again, or just peek in and help out, if it catches your fancy later on.  Cheers--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 14:27, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * You're doing fantastic work, best of luck. My main interest in the program was getting something going at the local university, and it looks like that's not going to happen, for now. - Dank (push to talk) 14:30, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

email
I've sent you an email. Netalarm talk 22:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that was helpful. We've had a surge of RFAs lately; keeping my fingers crossed. - Dank (push to talk) 23:48, 15 September 2010 (UTC)

for you

 * Thanks! - Dank (push to talk) 15:23, 16 September 2010 (UTC)

The Milhist election has started!
The Military history WikiProject coordinator election has started. You are cordially invited to help pick fourteen new coordinators from a pool of twenty candidates. This time round, the term has increased from six to twelve months so it is doubly important that you have your say! Please cast your vote here no later than 23:59 (UTC) on Tuesday, 28 September 2010.

With many thanks in advance for your participation from the coordinator team,  Roger Davies  talk 21:30, 16 September 2010 (UTC)


 * I know, I'm running for reelection :) - Dank (push to talk) 11:45, 23 September 2010 (UTC)

Version 0.8
Hi Dank, I hope that you're keeping well! We have the provisional Version 0.8 selection done, and we are about to start contacting WikiProjects to get their feedback. You can see a typical WikiProject (Chemistry) selection here. At this point during the Version 0.7 release, you organized copyediting assistance for articles that were "selected-but-still-a-bit-iffy". Would you like to do the same during this release? Sorry this is a bit last minute, but I thought you might like to know; I think your work with 0.7 was very helpful for those projects that participated in the cleanup. Regards, Walkerma (talk) 06:13, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Hi Martin, good to hear from you, thanks for thinking of me again, and glad to hear that V0.8 is moving along. Yes and no ... on the one hand, my wiki-time is completely booked ... see above, I'm having to give up things I very much wanted to do.  On the other hand, I'm more than happy to do copyediting work on MILHIST articles (when that's okay with the writers), and I'm sure MILHIST makes up a good chunk of V0.8.  I'll give a link here from WT:MHC. - Dank (push to talk) 13:01, 17 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for a quick reply. I fully understand being overcommitted!  Thanks for working on the MILHIST stuff - these articles get fixed one at a time, after all.  If you know anyone else who is interested on helping out, please send them our way.  Wikipedia 1.0 is getting very interesting - I think we now have the ability to produce selections rapidly and efficiently, but we'll have to see (through 0.8) if I'm right!  Regards, Walkerma (talk) 16:05, 17 September 2010 (UTC)

Favor?
After saying there was no quid pro quo, I would nevertheless like you to take a look at this sub-page for me if you can. I seem to be the only person trying to reduce or eliminate the stodgy misuse of this word. I'd like perhaps for this eventually to be either a MOS page or perhaps more realistically a part of Words to avoid. See what you have time for and no problem if you can't be bothered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by John (talk • contribs)
 * I gave it a shot, please see Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style_(words_to_watch). Chicago and other style guides say not to use "however" unless you really mean it, however (grin) we're trending toward fewer style guidelines rather than more. - Dank (push to talk) 04:12, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * And ... I have always taken a hard look at any "but" or "however" to make sure the two elements are actually being contrasted. I believe I cut more than half of the instances I find of both words. - Dank (push to talk) 04:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank you! And I'm sorry for the exaggeration (or understatement) inherent in I seem to be the only person, and for forgetting to sign my post. --John (talk) 04:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Not a problem. - Dank (push to talk) 12:46, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Block
Hi Dank you just blocked User talk:Britishwebsites they have created a new account User talk:RJWest Motiv and are still adding the copyvio about motivation theory by Richard West so I'm not sure if this username is also a promotional username could you have a look please thanks. Mo ainm ~Talk  18:37, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * It's not similar enough to the url or any product or company name to merit a username block, I think. Copyright violations should be tagged as such. - Dank (push to talk) 18:41, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Mo ainm  ~Talk  18:52, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Pending changes/Straw poll on interim usage
Hi. As you recently commented in the straw poll regarding the ongoing usage and trial of Pending changes, this is to notify you that there is an interim straw poll with regard to keeping the tool switched on or switching it off while improvements are worked on and due for release on November 9, 2010. This new poll is only in regard to this issue and sets no precedent for any future usage. Your input on this issue is greatly appreciated. Off2riorob (talk) 23:31, 20 September 2010 (UTC)

PediaPress renderer for Wikipedia Books
I thought you might be interested in this. Basically, this would give you access to the PediaPress renderer used to print books and should allow you to review book as they would be printed (minus covers). If you find errors and problems, please report them at Help:Books/Feedback.

You either received this message because
 * You edited several books
 * You are part of WikiProject Wikipedia-Books. (If you aren't, please free free to join in. We'll take any help we can.)

Delivered by MessageDeliveryBot on behalf of Headbomb (talk) at 16:06, 21 September 2010 (UTC).

SS v PS
Just in case you overlooked it. Gatoclass (talk) 05:58, 24 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Replied there, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 12:50, 24 September 2010 (UTC)

Congrats!
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. TomStar81 (Talk) 00:04, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for all your work, Tom, and gratz to you too. - Dank (push to talk) 02:39, 29 September 2010 (UTC)

Thanks

 * Very thoughtful, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 02:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

WikiCup 2010 September newsletter
We are half-way through our final round, entering the home straight. leads at the time of writing with 1180 points, immediately followed by with 1175 points. closely follows in third place with 1100 points. For those who are interested, data about the finalists has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/finalists, while a list of content submitted by all WikiCup contestants prior to this round has been compiled at WikiCup/History/2010/Submissions. As ever, anything contestants worry may not receive the necessary attention before the end of the round (such as outstanding GA or FA nominations) is welcome at WikiCup/Reviews, and please remember to continue offering reviews yourself where possible. As always, the judges are available to contact via email, IRC or their talk pages, and general discussion about the Cup is welcome on the WikiCup talk page.

Despite controversy, the WikiCup remains open. Signups for next year's competition are more than welcome, and suggestions for how next year's competition will work are appreciated at Wikipedia talk:WikiCup/Scoring. More general comments and discussions should be directed at the WikiCup talk page. One month remains in the 2010 WikiCup, after which we will know our champion. Good luck everyone! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn, Fox and The ed17 23:03, 30 September 2010 (UTC)

Your note about WP:UPDATE
Hi—those challenges ... One is to understand what these particles mean in isolation, outside their context. One could, of course, hit every link, one by one, and read up on it. But that would be a major task for editors. The other challenge is to aim it at the right readership. Is this for general editors who might want to "bone up" on the guidelines and policies generally, to keep abreast of them as a good citizen (laudable, but I'm unsure many people do that, given the size and specialisation of many of the guidelines and policies). It's less likely that an editor in particular need would make WP:UPDATE their first port of call; rather, they'd go check the specific guideline, either for the first time or to check it hasn't changed. Few readers want to know generally that now we write "Ganges", not the local version, "Ganga". That change is the basis for a talk-page exchange, i think. The Signpost has a wide readership, of course, and a need to "be interesting", or at least as much as possible. That underlines why you've posted here, I guess. My feeling is that even in the UPDATE page itself, let alone ''The Signpost", one could often express the change very crisply, in short form. Rather than:
 * In WP:TITLE#Titles containing "and", added: [Where no reasonable overarching title is available,] "it is permissible to" [construct an article title using "and" ...]. Added: "However, titles with "and" are often red flags that the article has neutrality problems or is engaging in Original research. For this reason," [avoid use of "and" in ways that appear biased. For example, use Islamic terrorism, not "Islam and terrorism".] "Also avoid the use of "and" to combine concepts that are not commonly combined in reliable sources."

Perhaps:
 * [insert pipe of the subject rather than the page: "Titles containing "and""]: Avoid the use of "and" in ways that may appear biased through coupling: "Acronyms and initialisms", but not "Islam and terrorism".

Since there's a link, rationing to a very very short example where possible could bring this within reach of the general reader who wants to keep abreast. The short version gets through to me; the long version that appeals to the exact legislation, is really hard. Otherwise, I turn off at the text here and at the link, I'm afraid. PS, I think it should be policies and guidelines. Tony  (talk)  03:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)
 * We're agreed on what the best end product would look like, we're just not agreed on who should do it ... I don't have any philosophical objection to saying "This is what you really meant to say", I just don't have time for the endless arguments that would plunge me into. That's the reason for this proposal ... I'm trying to get the community to do that for me, in some fashion.  I'll say more at WT:POST, but feel free to reply here, any time. - Dank (push to talk) 12:44, 1 October 2010 (UTC)

HMS Speedy (1782)
Hi Dank - the editor who nominated the above article at FAC hasn't edited at Wikipedia for around 10 days now. Do you know whether you would be interested in trying to wrap up outstanding issues, or know someone who would? Cheers, hamiltonstone (talk) 10:50, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I'm sorry, I have no idea how I'd even begin to answer User:Sarastro1's 15 questions. It's not my "period", and I don't have any of the books. - Dank (push to talk) 12:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)

Citation Style Guide
Hey, Dank, I have a quick question. I'm finding myself confused by the various citation styles presented to me for essay writing (APA, MLA, Chicago Style). You're much more familiar with the placing of names to conventions than I am. Which style did we use for Japanese battleship Haruna? Thanks, Cam (Chat)(Prof) 00:30, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * For APA and MLA style, see APA_style and Parenthetical referencing. In Chicago style (2003), "the citation notes should be numbered and appear as endnotes. The substantive notes, indicated by asterisks and other symbols, appear as footnotes".  To that extent, we used Chicago style. - Dank (push to talk) 03:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thank-you. That's all I needed to know. Cam (Chat)(Prof) 17:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

HMS Liverpool ACR
Hi Dank! First of all, I want to express my profound gratitude for your contributions to the Liverpool article. Once I've finished implementing the suggestions, I'll respond in full to the ACR (probably in a few hours or, should I be distracted, by the end of the day). Thanks again! If there's anyway I can reciprocate through, for instance, copyediting, don't hesitate to leave a note on my talk page. SoLando (Talk) 16:47, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that's kind of you. I thought all the reviewers added something important; that's the experience I want everyone at a MILHIST A-class review to have. - Dank (push to talk) 18:46, 4 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2
As a reviewer at Featured article candidates/Yao Ming, I thought you might consider commenting at Featured article candidates/Juwan Howard/archive2.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:59, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
 * If I can get caught up on my wiki-work, I'll have a look. - Dank (push to talk) 02:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)

Something for you
Thanks kindly. - Dank (push to talk) 11:54, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Battlecruiser
Is in pretty poor shape, wouldn't you say? I do have an ulterior motive in mentioning this... --John (talk) 04:43, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's too long, for one thing. But I really can't take on extra projects right now, I'm struggling to keep up with SHIPS articles that show up at GAN, A-class and FAC.  Maybe later in the month.  Great edit at Japanese battleship Kongō, btw.  - Dank (push to talk) 13:34, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Understood. Thanks! --John (talk) 03:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I wanted to add something about the battlecruiser's limited impact in WW1. Incidentally, I don't think it's ever worth saying: "...in 1921. In January of that year..." It's one of the things I trim out, though not as a result of MoS guidance but just my own feeling that it is usually superfluous when the year has just been mentioned. As always, just revert if you disagree. --John (talk) 08:02, 10 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I wasn't entirely happy with it either. The problem is that this article rarely uses topic sentences, and often uses the syntax "X happened on this date. Y happened on that date" to mean that Y came after X.  I've changed the first sentence to "Throughout 1943, ...", so that it sounds more like a topic sentence.  That plus the later mention of February 1943 should nail it down, if that works for you. - Dank (push to talk) 12:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)

Battle of Alton WPMILHIST A-Class review
Hey, I noticed that you've participated some Military History A-Class reviews before. The review for Battle of Alton is coming up on its time limit, and it needs more eyes. Would you mind taking a look at in the next few days? Thanks. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 12:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)

Erzherzog Franz Ferdinand FAC
I've nominated EFF for another FAC, and as you commented last time, I would like you to look her over again. Thanks! Buggie111 (talk) 01:37, 13 October 2010 (UTC)

Return to AMX (another favor??)
Remember when I asked your opinion on an RfC about The Autobiography of Malcolm X? Well thankfully the dispute has been resolved amicably and the two former parties to the dispute are working towards a GA/FA on the article. Any gnomish help you can offer would be wonderful. Protonk (talk) 04:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Sure thing. - Dank (push to talk) 04:31, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't know, it's a hard slog. I copyedited the lead, but the first sentence of the first section calls him a "petty thief-turned-human rights activist".  Hyphenation aside, there's a BLP problem here, I think. - Dank (push to talk) 13:17, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not really. He's been dead for 40 years. Protonk (talk) 18:14, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Haha, good point. - Dank (push to talk) 20:15, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
 * It's a bit hyperbolic, I'll grant. If you read the book, it really is a story (insofar as it is a story and not piece of rhetoric) about Malcolm X's fall, prison conversion and rise.  Petty thievery being a necessary component. :) Protonk (talk) 20:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)

Chain Saw FAC
If you have time, I was wondering if you could go over The Texas Chain Saw Massacre's FAC, and see whether you could fully support it this time round. Thanks, -- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 10:07, 17 October 2010 (UTC)
 * I don't support for the sections that I haven't copyedited. - Dank (push to talk) 15:41, 17 October 2010 (UTC)


 * I see. Well, thanks anyway.-- The Taerkasten ( talk ) 15:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia DC Meetup, October 23
You are invited to Wikipedia DC Meetup #12 on Saturday, October 23, 6pm at Bertucci's in Foggy Bottom. Special guests at this meetup will include Wikimedia CTO Danese Cooper, other Wikimedia technical staff and volunteer developers who will be in DC for Hack-A-Ton DC. Please RSVP on the meetup page.

You can remove your name from the Washington DC Meetups invite list at Meetup/DC/Invite/List.

To keep up-to-date on local events, you can also join our mailing list. This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:01, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

World Science Festival
Please see User_talk:Dana_boomer. Best, Sandy Georgia (Talk) 18:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Mississippi class battleship
Dank, I've been busy in real life, or my other escape from real life, organizing a large regatta and shore party for our yacht club. All came off as a great success, and I'm back to WP for a while. I tried to address all of your concerns today, but have a few questions remaining. I responded in-line to most of your concerns, which were substantially resolved (I hope). However, a few issues remain, mostly around the Pre-dreadnought section which requires major effort. I broke-out your comments into a new section below, where maybe we can discuss if your time permits before I forge off in the wrong direction. The other glaring issue is hyphenating the title and references to the class; I don't disagree, in fact I have no opinion other than what is done to this article should be done throughout the project. Perhaps this article's progression should not hinge on that decision, which could be handled in a broader venue. I would likely support you efforts. Cheers! --Kevin Murray (talk) 02:19, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks Kevin, answered there. - Dank (push to talk) 05:42, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

I had misunderstood. I now see that you were making examples of the first sections. One final question: do you feel that the scope and level of detail are appropriate for A-class, but the level of style needs improving? I would like to move forward in improving other articles on US battleships, but want to make sure that I'm on the right track. Can you recommend a good copy editor? --Kevin Murray (talk) 17:08, 23 October 2010 (UTC)
 * See User:Dank/Copyediting for some links where you can post a request. I think you'll be able to find someone. - Dank (push to talk) 19:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)

Talkback
WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • lost • defense • attack) 20:25, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

WikiCopter (radio • sorties • images • lost • defense • attack) 22:45, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

tks
Tks for your comments on my nom. I didn't see cruelty or anything negative at all in them. I just wanted to let you (and others) know that I am not in a bad mood now and was not then. Look at my contribs; after screaming at the trivia guy, I continued cheerfully helping n00bs, e.g. at Talk:Diagnostic Enterprise Method. My nom doesn't say I'll moderate my moods; I don't need to do that. My nom says I'll stop screaming at folks. That's all. Tks. (I also copied this reply to the nom page, as it is relevant. Sorry if that's confusing)... &bull; Ling.Nut (talk) 08:23, 29 October 2010 (UTC)
 * Not confusing and thanks very much for the personal reply, I'll reply over there. - Dank (push to talk) 13:33, 29 October 2010 (UTC)