User talk:Dank/Archive 58

FAC reviewing barnstar

 * Thanks again. - Dank (push to talk) 15:12, 3 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Seconded. Ceoil (talk) 14:28, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Another old FA
Hey Dank, one reason I didn't suggest Aug 15 for India was because I was hoping Flag of India could go around that date (15 Aug when it became official or 22 July when it was adopted). I'd asked Crisco about this a couple of years back but back then they weren't doing reruns. This article was TFA in 2005 right after it was promoted, and went through a complete rewrite in 2010 at FAR and hasn't been on the main page since. I don't particularly care about the timing of either and am good with India going out on Aug 15 too, but if reruns are being considered now then I'd like Flag of India to be considered too. Maybe has some suggestion on this. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  05:52, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I haven't take a look at Flag of India yet, but will soon. On the other hand if you are looking for an Indian history FA, you could consider my FA of some years ago (I've forgotten how long ago): Political history of Mysore and Coorg (1565–1760).  23 January could be one date, for that is when a mighty empire fell, but really any date would work.  The article has been languishing in obscurity for a long time.  Or, you might think it is too academic for the front page, and that would be fine too.   Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  07:53, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm slated to schedule February, May, August and November next year. The list I've put together so far is at User:Dank/Sandbox/4, and I'll be asking for comments on those soon at WT:TFA. I think we can take advantage of the fact that India is far ahead of GMT, and use both India and Flag of India, on 14 and 15 August GMT, which will both overlap 15 August in India. F&F, I'll add that article and Kingdom of Mysore to my Sandbox/2, and take another look at those a year from December when we're working on 2019. - Dank (push to talk) 14:12, 11 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I know I should be commenting at WT:TFA, but please note that the 14th August is Pakistan's independence day, both nations having being created officially at midnight August 14-15, 1947, but one's independence celebrated on the 14th and the other's the following day. You might want to feature Muhammad Ali Jinnah for 14 August.  The last time it was featured was in 2006.  Two India pages, especially one that might be seen as patriotic even though it is not (i.e. Flag of India), back to back, might elicit concern.  26 January 2019 would be appropriate for Flag of India.  Thanks, by the way, for considering the Political History of Mysore and Coorg etc.  Best regards,  Fowler&amp;fowler  «Talk»  02:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't know that ... sure, Jinnah sounds great. - Dank (push to talk) 02:23, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * SpacemanSpiff, does 26 January 2019 work for you? - Dank (push to talk) 04:04, 12 September 2017 (UTC)


 * Any date is good with me Dank, I was just hoping to have it on the main page once :) I'll trust Fowler's judgement on all this as this is his area of expertise. Thanks again. cheers. &mdash; Spaceman  Spiff  04:08, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Wehwalt, does Jinnah on 14 August work for you too? I see you suggested this for December. - Dank (push to talk) 04:57, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I had planned to discuss running it with other regular editors of the Jinnah article to get their views of running it.--Wehwalt (talk) 07:27, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * If that works out, would you rather that it run in January? F&F's idea of putting it on Pakistan's independence day in August, back-to-back with India for India's independence day, has some appeal. - Dank (push to talk) 13:36, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

TFA for 2 Nov
Hi Dank, given your role as a TFA coordinator I wanted to bring to your attention the ongoing work to get the Balfour Declaration article ready for TFA on 2 November, which will be its 100th anniversary. The article is currently at WP:FAC, so there's no guarantee that it will make it in time, but I live in hope.

I note on WP:TFAP that Warren G. Harding is currently penciled in for the same date, as it will be his 152nd birthday.

Is there anywhere I should formally note this potential nomination, so that editors are aware of it if and when the 2 November date comes up for discussion?

Many thanks, Onceinawhile (talk) 15:53, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * There's nothing I can do until it passes FAC. - Dank (push to talk) 16:09, 12 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm sad to say that it is looking less likely now that the FAC review page has been archived.
 * I have opened another peer review in the hope of receiving further input. I remember that you commented on the first peer review – if you have the time and inclination to take another look at some point it would be greatly appreciated. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:11, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Dank, I was delighted to see you continuing your copyediting at BD today (I decided to stop any more tweaking when I saw your previous message as I didn’t want to disrupt your review). I was developing answers to your comments (notables is the common term for Ottoman Ayan, and on origins, I have been reviewing sources to see how the best ones deal with that nuance). I saw though that you removed your comments - is there anything I can do to encourage you to continue? Onceinawhile (talk) 17:21, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I wasn't pulling out because you hadn't responded; in fact, people don't usually mind at FAC if you take a week, or sometimes more, to respond. I've got stomach troubles today; I'll think about it tomorrow. - Dank (push to talk) 17:48, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Oh gosh, that certainly puts things in context. I hope you start to feel better soon. Onceinawhile (talk) 19:20, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for completing the review, for your excellent comments, and for your kind words. I hope this means you’re feeling better. Onceinawhile (talk) 23:31, 10 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I am, thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 23:39, 10 October 2017 (UTC)

TFA Planet Stories Sept 20
Re "but did manage on occasion to obtain work from well-known names" vs "did manage to obtain work from well-known names on occasion"

Neither is ideal. In mine, the first, the adverb would have been better placed after did (Cambridge: "Where there is more than one verb, mid position means after the first auxiliary verb or after a modal verb"), i.e. "did on occasion manage to obtain work . . .". In yours, the modifier is separated from the term it modifies by too many intervening words, leaving what it modifies unclear. Possibly better than either would be: "did occasionally manage to obtain work . . .". What do you think?

I would also suggest names --> writers/authors; metonymy notwithstanding, names don't write stories.

And as far as I'm concerned, you're welcome to merrily split infinitives to your heart's content, but there are those who might feel picky about "to regularly attract".

Cheers, Awien (talk) 00:30, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * The text seems fine to me. - Dank (push to talk) 01:00, 14 September 2017 (UTC)
 * It'll be better once I move the adverb to a better place; won't bother with the metonymy or the split infinitive. Yours collaboratively, Awien (talk) 12:10, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Invitation to Admin confidence survey
Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

James Joyce
Give it a few months, and a revisit. There is an unlikely gremlin griping in edit summaries that I might need to deal with on talk. Will let you know when ready. Ceoil (talk) 14:22, 16 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Ideally, we want to do a reasonable job of meeting the criteria at User:Dank/Sandbox/2, and that means that occasionally we'll be dealing with older, sketchier FAs. Joyce meets several of the criteria, so it would be nice to include him ... but if it gets to be too much of a pain, it's okay, we're not going to have a problem finding 5 reruns per month. Thanks so much for your work on the reruns. - Dank (push to talk) 14:35, 16 September 2017 (UTC)

Dead links (2)
Hi Dank, not sure if you've followed the discussion about User:FA RotBot which arose out of the discussion up-page User_talk:Dank. The bot's been been approved and completed ready to go. But unfortunately FA contact User:Dweller is stepping aside from Wikipedia duties for a while or maybe forever. So we have no point of contact among the Featured Article coordinators and I'm concerned about running the bot without support. -- Green  C  17:50, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * I can't imagine the coords having a problem with bot runs, given that IABot is already working its way through all 5 million articles every few months. (I have been triggering IABot manually, and have had no problem with it.) What kind of schedule did you have in mind for this new bot? - Dank (push to talk) 18:10, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Just need someone's name because right now it's Dweller on the User:FA RotBot page as the contact. Can I use your name? The thinking is once a week unless you have a suggestion. -- Green  C  18:51, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, use my name. Once a week is fine. - Dank (push to talk) 18:52, 20 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Pinging this is just IABot, which already runs regularly on all WP articles. Please let me know if you see any problems. - Dank (push to talk) 21:26, 20 September 2017 (UTC)

2017 Military history WikiProject Coordinator election
Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Dan Leno
Hi Dan, hope you're well. I was notified by Mike Christie that Leno would be subject to TFA (again) on the 18 October which, as you can predict, I was not particularly happy about. This will be Leno's second time as TFA which to me suggests these are shortages of FAs to list, would I be right? Just for reference, I don't have a problem with you listing any of the stuff I've written for FA, and that includes George Robey, Michael Hordern, or any future FA I might write. I know I've dug my heels in in the past with regards to Robey, but it cannot be easy to find things to list. I know I don't get the final decision anyway, but I do appreciate my thoughts being listened to, as you have done in the past.  Cassianto Talk   09:20, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Good to see you, Cassianto, sorry about the circumstances. Mike scheduled this, but he has already stepped down, and Jim is finishing up October for him. Let me talk with Jim, we won't be long. - Dank (push to talk) 13:09, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Of course it's out of my hands now, but just a note to say I would have looked for something else if I'd realized that Cassianto wasn't keen on rerunning this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:11, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike ... I've emailed Jim. If he's already left for the weekend, I'll pull it. - Dank (push to talk) 13:15, 29 September 2017 (UTC)


 * , as you guessed, we are short of FAs outside a few topics, such as birds, hurricanes and fungi, so we are having to recycle. We try not to rerun against editors' wishes, and, as it happens, I had a non-date-linked 2017 article, ice core on my list to run as soon as I got the chance, so I'll schedule that instead. Thanks Jimfbleak - talk to me?  15:35, 29 September 2017 (UTC)
 * Hi Both. I honestly don't mind seeing any of the FAs I've written up on TFA, seriously. I do genuinely love presenting my work to the wider readership, but the only thing I cannot stand is the infobox dramas that a lot of the articles I write, cause. Such drama invariably leads to a block or a period of lethargy. I'm keen to avoid both, especially because of the fun I'm currently having writing this. I can tell you that currently, I have Robey, Hordern and Burke and Hare murders still yet to appear, although the latter was a co-nom with . Best wishes to both.  Cassianto Talk   19:16, 29 September 2017 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstar

 * Thanks Mike. - Dank (push to talk) 12:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Jul to Sep 2017 Milhist article reviewing

 * Thanks AR. - Dank (push to talk) 12:07, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves

 * Thanks kindly AR. Replied there. - Dank (push to talk) 14:42, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for edits to Lesley J. McNair article
I've been following your work to tighten up the narrative in the article on Lesley J. McNair. I did the bulk of the writing, including the references, for the current iteration of the article, and I appreciate the improvements.

Have you given any thought to supporting my nomination of the McNair article for "featured" status?

Featured article candidates/Lesley J. McNair/archive1

Billmckern (talk) 15:00, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm down to Individual replacement system so far. - Dank (push to talk) 15:22, 7 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I supported on prose, with comments. - Dank (push to talk) 13:54, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

Battle of Khe Sahn
G'day, Dan, hope you are well. Not sure if you got my ping here:. If you did, apologies for hassling you again. I know you don't usually take requests anymore, but wondering if you might take a look at the Battle of Khe Sanh article. It's a 10-year-old old A-class article (failed FAC awhile ago, too), that I am trying to bring back up to scratch. I think I've addressed the major issues that have been shaken out by the re-appraisal, so it seems ready for a copy editor's eye. No dramas if you are too busy, or not keen. Anyway, all the best. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Stop by any time, AR. There's no record in my alerts that I got that ping. Just below that diff, Diannaa says "This whole paragraph is copyvio and will have to be re-written or removed." When editors copy a whole paragraph, it usually means there's not a lot of point in prettying the rest of it up, right? Has anyone offered to go through all the sources and rewrite everything that needs rewriting? - Dank (push to talk) 01:07, 14 October 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, Dan, Diannaa's comment was before the ping. I already had a go at rewriting/removing and am reasonably sure that I've identified and excised all the copyvio stuff now. There was a lot, though, so maybe I missed something. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 01:23, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

The aftermath of the speedy deletion of the Oska Software page by Alan503
I wonder what the deleted page for Oska Software was like prior to speedy deletion. --DimaLeon2000 (talk) 09:28, 16 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It was "Oska software is the worlds largest distributor of interactive characters for Microsoft Windows® based computers. The characters are called DeskMates on the website". You can ask about creating new articles at the WP:TEAHOUSE. - Dank (push to talk) 13:17, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

RSPB Minsmere
Hi Dan, I've just started working this up towards FA. There is a bit of Tudor and WWII military stuff, should I add a Milhist project link to the talk page? Jimfbleak - talk to me?  06:43, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * My understanding is that it doesn't meet the informal rule of thumb for these sorts of articles, that is, it doesn't have a substantial section devoted to military history. - Dank (push to talk) 09:49, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Makes sense. I've barely started yet, so unless my researches turn up something suitable later, I'll leave as is. Interesting that despite being an RSPB reserve it wasn't listed for the bird project until I added it today Jimfbleak - talk to me?  10:15, 20 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I really like your nature reserve articles ... they're calming in a crazy world. - Dank (push to talk) 15:26, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Swapping two ...
Per User talk:Swpb, I'll be switching sea mink and the other article as soon as I finish up with scheduling... just giving you a heads up. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:13, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * And done... I remember (vaguely) being that excited about having an article on the main page... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:31, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, if that's the worst reaction we get this month, then we're ahead of the curve :) Great work, and thanks much for coming on board. - Dank (push to talk) 17:40, 21 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I'll cross my fingers but am not going to bet on it... but I'm a cynical old bitch. Ealdgyth - Talk 17:42, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Dollar +
Today's featured article/requests/Susan B. Anthony dollar - please help yourself if you like any of it, - such as the image, - I try not to interfer. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:32, 23 October 2017 (UTC)

Same for Today's featured article/requests/Presque Isle State Park. Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:35, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I'm just getting started on the first one. On the second one, Johnboddie already did most of it, I didn't realize it came from TFAR, sorry. - Dank (push to talk) 21:57, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * It didn't come from TFAR recently, - in 2016, there were concerns about refs. Next month, check out WP:QAI ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 22:26, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Victoria, FYI, the failed TFAR she's talking about is Today's featured article/requests/Presque Isle State Park. - Dank (push to talk) 23:53, 23 October 2017 (UTC)
 * it looks as if the state park has had some attention recently, whether it's enough, I don't know. Jimfbleak - talk to me?  05:49, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * I scheduled based on from August 2017 and and here is me removing it. Ealdgyth - Talk 11:46, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Looks good. - Dank (push to talk) 12:57, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Balfour ....
Is now set up at Today's featured article/November 2, 2017. I think I got the other changes neede - removed the maindate bit from the road and added it to Balfour. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:44, 29 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Great, working on it now. - Dank (push to talk) 13:45, 29 October 2017 (UTC)