User talk:Harrison49/Archive 1


 * } Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

RAF Uxbridge
Glad to hear my comments were useful - welcome back! Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 15:58, 23 February 2011 (UTC)
 * I will be glad to look at it, but am swamped at the moment so it will take me several days at least. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:30, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
 * WHere would you like me to make comments? On the article talk page? Or would you like to open a new peer review? Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 19:27, 25 March 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:RAF_Northolt_satellite.png
Thanks for uploading File:RAF_Northolt_satellite.png. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. feydey (talk) 14:57, 2 March 2011 (UTC)

Replaceable fair use File:RAF West Ruislip.png
Thanks for uploading File:RAF West Ruislip.png. I noticed the description page specifies that the media is being used under a claim of fair use, but its use in Wikipedia articles fails our first non-free content criterion in that it illustrates a subject for which a freely licensed media could reasonably be found or created that provides substantially the same information or which could be adequately covered with text alone. If you believe this media is not replaceable, please:


 * 1) Go to the media description page and edit it to add, without deleting the original replaceable fair use template.
 * 2) On the image discussion page, write the reason why this image is not replaceable at all.

Alternatively, you can also choose to replace this non-free media by finding freely licensed media of the same subject, requesting that the copyright holder release this (or similar) media under a free license, or by taking a picture of it yourself.

If you have uploaded other non-free media, consider checking that you have specified how these images fully satisfy our non-free content criteria. You can find a list of description pages you have edited by clicking on [ this link]. Note that even if you follow steps 1 and 2 above, non-free media which could be replaced by freely licensed alternatives will be deleted 2 days after this notification (7 days if uploaded before 13 July 2006), per our non-free content policy. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you. Rettetast (talk) 22:25, 5 March 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LX, February 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 21:50, 17 March 2011 (UTC)

RAF Northolt peer review
Sure. Just let me know when you think it's ready for another look. Finetooth (talk) 01:24, 18 March 2011 (UTC)

Talk:Michael Walker, Baron Walker of Aldringham/GA1
Hi, I've replied to your comment there. The place of birth and education are both in the first reference. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   21:56, 20 March 2011 (UTC)

David Richards (British Army officer)
Hey, I don't think Richards is ready for GA just yet. The article is big, but, once you scratch beneath the surface, you realise it's not really comprehensive. There's a lot of recentism, fluff and undue weight being given to minor controversies in which he was tangentially involved. The other problem is that, because he's still CDS, the article isn't really stable enough, but that could be resolved if the article were better cared for. It might be better to withdraw the GA nomination and work on the article a bit more. There's enough written about his career that it could be a GA. If you want something to compare it to, I think Mike Jackson (not to blow my own trumpet) is the best article on a post-WWII British Army general we have at the minute. HJ Mitchell &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   23:49, 20 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yeah, there's a bot that will sort the rest of it. Let me know if you need a hand with it—getting a sitting CDS to GA would certainly be a challenge. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:03, 21 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I'd say RAF Uxbridge could be a GA, just at a glance. I don't know what suggestions the reviewer might have, but I'd make sure everything was referenced and there was no major detail being left out before nominating. HJ Mitchell  &#124;  Penny for your thoughts?   00:15, 21 March 2011 (UTC)

RAF Northolt peer review
Yes, but I won't be able to get to it until at least Wednesday (maybe Thursday). I'm in the middle of a difficult FLC nomination. Finetooth (talk) 22:35, 22 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I've added a few more comments and a suggestion to the bottom of the existing PR. I wish I had time to do more, but I don't. I think, though, that you will be fine with it if you can track down a copyeditor familiar with the Manual of Style. Finetooth (talk) 19:48, 24 March 2011 (UTC)

Battle of Britain Day
No probs. Hopefully it will be easy! Dapi89 (talk) 17:43, 23 March 2011 (UTC)
 * I have fixed the links. I don't have much more on the prelim battles to expand upon them. They were not really that important I suppose. I added them to include all combat on that date. Dapi89 (talk) 19:50, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

RAF Northolt
One good turn deserves another! Since I havn't had to wait long, and seems as if the above article (BoB Day) is going to breeze through, I am happy to help out on Northolt. I have some interesting stuff, including Philip Birtles' Battle of Britain Airfields. If there is anything in particular you want or need, I might be able to help. Just ask. Dapi89 (talk) 20:01, 23 March 2011 (UTC)

GAN of Bravo November
Hello, with regards to the GAN of Bravo November, what specificaly do you think is lacking from the article. I'll be honest and say that I can't seem to find anything to add to the construction section than what is already there. Was there something specific? Thanks, Woody (talk) 19:38, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * It seemed a bit short considering the history of the aircraft. However, if there really isn't any other information than what you've found, I'll tick that section off. Harrison49 (talk) 19:47, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, I understand that. How does it look now? I've added what I can find. Thanks, Woody (talk) 20:17, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Yes that's much better. Once the lead section is expanded the article can be passed. Harrison49 (talk) 20:27, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Expanded the lead thanks. Woody (talk) 21:26, 28 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Are there any phrases or passages that give you particular cause for concern? Or is it a more general requirement of yours for a copyedit? Whilst I understand they can be beneficial, if there are no specific concerns then I would rather use the GOCE before any attempt at FAC rather than GAN. Woody (talk) 08:14, 29 March 2011 (UTC)
 * Ok, I understand now. Thanks for the advice, I will certainly head there before any FAC or the like. Thank you very much for your time and your review. Woody (talk) 15:17, 30 March 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Manor Farm, Ruislip
Cheers, Big  Dom  08:03, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Handley Page Victor - referencing
This book may be a more suitable source of information: Brookes, Andrew and Chris Davey. Victor Units of the Cold War. The ultimate usage of references is to provide a formal, unquestionable source of evidence for facts stated in articles. We can't link other informal websites, they may have been just copying Wikipedia to begin with, thus creating a chain loop of misinformation falsely verifying each other. Books are pretty much the most unquestionable sources there are, and that should be a good one on the topic. We'll get the article fixed up, we'll do a good job on it. Kyteto (talk) 21:10, 12 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ruislip Manor
The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Swakeleys House
The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 15 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: GA nomination of Battle of Ismailia
Thanks for reviewing the article! Much appreciated. Cheers! --Sherif9282 (talk) 22:52, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

RAF Coastal Command
I notice you have nominated the article. I have have added my name to the nominee page as the main contributor. If you think it needs anymore work anywhere just give me a nudge. I am also thinking about nominating CC in WWII. Dapi89 (talk) 11:40, 17 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Yep, I own them all. What do you need? Dapi89 (talk) 17:49, 30 April 2011 (UTC)
 * What to you think of it now? Is it okay? Dapi89 (talk) 18:01, 8 May 2011 (UTC)
 * Thanks. Dapi89 (talk) 19:42, 8 May 2011 (UTC)

RAF Northolt

 * Things are done now. Thanks for the GA review. Dapi89 (talk) 12:01, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Featured article candidates/RAF Northolt/archive1
Good work. I hope you'll give Milhist's A-class review a try with some of your articles; we have a lot of knowledgeable people, and few of us bite. - Dank (push to talk) 21:14, 20 April 2011 (UTC)

Re: Leonard Murray GA review
Many thanks for your review - many of us put a lot of work into our wikiworld and the occasional feedback is much appreciated. Friendofleonard (talk) 12:51, 21 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ruislip-Northwood Urban District
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 25 April 2011 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXI, March 2011
To stop receiving this newsletter, please list yourself in the appropriate section here. To assist with preparing the newsletter, please visit the newsroom. BrownBot (talk) 01:54, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Thank!~
for the GA review of Rescue of Bat 21 Bravo. I appreciate your taking the time to do this. — btphelps (talk) (contribs) 03:07, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Baron Carrickfergus DYK
Thank you very much for reviewing the DYK for Baron Carrickfergus however I think I may have made a bit of a mess up of the picture when trying to do the rollover and alternate text, could you possibly fix the errors please as I'm not sure what went wrong. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 12:10, 29 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Oh never mind then. Thanks anyway. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 12:15, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ickenham
The article Ickenham 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 seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:Ickenham for things which need to be addressed. Deryck C. 21:58, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The article Ickenham you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ickenham for comments about the article. Well done! Deryck C. 23:26, 29 April 2011 (UTC)


 * PS:
 * Well done for producing the first Good Article about a place in Europe whose name begins with "I".
 * It's always so much better working with people from the same time zone, for which responses come in before you begin waiting for them. Thanks for your quick action! --Deryck C. 23:28, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

RAF Coastal Command...
...the review's done, and the article is on hold. Cheers, Hchc2009 (talk) 07:40, 30 April 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Hillingdon House
Gatoclass (talk) 18:03, 3 May 2011 (UTC)

GOCE drive newsletter
Sent on behalf of the Guild of Copy Editors using AWB on 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)

DYK for Ruislip Woods
The DYK project (nominate) 06:02, 6 May 2011 (UTC)