User talk:Peacemaker67/Archive 17

Images on Bezen Perrot
I have taken up the GA review of Bezen Perrot. I think that the images are appropriately licensed. Would have a look? Regards, Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk &bull;&#32;mail) 06:09, 11 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I've had a look, the licensing on both needs work, the magazine seems to be copyrighted until 2053 (70 years pma), but the editor could probably justify a non-free rationale for the photograph. I've left a detailed response there. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:33, 12 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Navy of the Independent State of Croatia
The article Navy of the Independent State of Croatia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Navy of the Independent State of Croatia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 11:41, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Waterloo Bay massacre
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Waterloo Bay massacre 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 Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 12:02, 13 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Waterloo Bay massacre
The article Waterloo Bay massacre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Waterloo Bay massacre for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 10:41, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T6
The article Yugoslav torpedo boat T6 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav torpedo boat T6 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:21, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 32nd Infantry Division Triglavski
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 32nd Infantry Division Triglavski 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 10:41, 15 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kragujevac massacre
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Kragujevac massacre 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 03:40, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 32nd Infantry Division Triglavski
The article 32nd Infantry Division Triglavski you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:32nd Infantry Division Triglavski for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 05:21, 16 January 2017 (UTC)

RfC
Bear in mind that you are abusing the RfC as a tool for a discussion. You are counting on votes not on the facts.--178.221.137.49 (talk) 09:20, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm doing nothing of the sort. I'm engaging with the community to achieve a consensus on Cohen, not edit warring in an attempt to get my way. Good luck with your strategy... Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:23, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Further, stop abusing warning like the one: ARBMAC warning. Academic appraisals of someone's work cannot be managed/validated by some Wikipedia commitees. --178.221.137.49 (talk) 09:41, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Just making sure that you, as a new editor, understand what discretionary sanctions are. Have a better one. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:52, 17 January 2017 (UTC)

Serbian historiography article
Hi Peacemaker67

In recent times i edited and added much content to a article named Serbian historiography. I based the content on wp:reliable and wp:secondary sources. I based the layout of the article on the Historiography of Albania article which Antidiskriminator had mainly edited and structured. I thought that as that was stable and no one had brought up issues with it over the years, then replicating that layout for the Serbian historiography page would be apt. As such after editing and so on, I nominated the article for GA consideration. In the talk there were other views by editors about possible deficiencies though explained in a vague manner that may hamper it becoming a GA article. Considering your vast expertise of engaging with Balkan related articles i would value much your input/advice on the article and what needs to be done to get it up to scratch (i.e: go to uni and get more sources if recommended and needed, etc). Best regards. Resnjari (talk) 05:03, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, . Great work so far, I must say. It is a very difficult subject to navigate, and quite fraught with obstacles. You are very kind with your mention of my engagement with Balkan articles, but I have to say that I do not have an academic knowledge of Serbian historiography, beyond a passing knowledge from what is mentioned in books by Western academics like Sabrina Ramet and those that have collaborated with her, like Dubravka Stojanović. I would strongly suggest that, if the reliable sources talk about four stages of the development of Serbian historiography, you organise the article using those four stages rather than the 26 themes. It makes sense to have the article reflect the various stages of its development as outlined in the literature, and the material you have called themes could be divided (and no doubt subdivided) between those four stages, to make the article better reflect how academics have explained it. Good luck with it, I've watchlisted it to see how you progress, and would be interested in providing some feedback once you are ready for someone to take a look. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Peacemaker67, thank you for the advice and an excellent suggestion ! :) In our neck of the woods, the recent history wars thing with historians Keith Windschuttle on one end and Robert Mann on the other, many a essay has been written for uni, so i thought i would give historiography thing go on Balkan related stuff since stuff is available to me. Very complicated though. On dividing and subdidivng the article into those four sections. Would you say it would best to create four sections containing by spreading those themes separate to the Modern Serbian historiography section and its subsection Post communist Serbian historiography (1980s-present)? Or should i implant those four sections within the context of those two sections and enlarge them ? What seems more feasible and a succinct way of undertaking the task at hand ? Best.Resnjari (talk) 12:22, 17 January 2017 (UTC)
 * I suggest you break the article up into the four identified stages of traditional historiography, Ruvarac's critical school, Communist–Marxist legacy, and the renewed Serbian national movement, and try to integrate what you have already written into those stages. I think the renewed Serbian national movement should include what you've called "modern Serbian historiography", but we should call it what most academics call it. I'm not sure what that would be, but clearly the SANU threads that began during the 1980s and 1990s are part of that stage. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:37, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Please, avoid removing sourced text
In the Philip J. Cohen you repeatedly removed sourced text. This diff shows it clearly. Bear in mind that Israeli referenced and quoted the Dennis Reinhartz's review which is already given in the article.--109.92.70.39 (talk) 07:55, 18 January 2017 (UTC)

Genocide of Serbs during World War II
Hi Peacemaker67! I see an agreement here that the best solution is to change it back to persecution. Can you move article to the previous name? Also, Resnjari suggested this. Ktrimi991 (talk) 23:27, 20 January 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:22, 21 January 2017 (UTC)

Bulgarian Warcrimes of WWI
Hey. I got my hands on Album des crimes bulgares, it contains photographic evidence of Bulgarian attrocities commited following the Toplica Uprising and Surdulica massacre, among others. I was wondering whether the copyright has expired, as I want to take the photos from it and upload them on Wikimedia Commons.--Catlemur (talk) 16:27, 23 January 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day. I would say so, unless the photographers are named. Anonymous photographs from a book published in 1919 in France would probably be and , but if you really want to make sure before you upload a heap, I'd check for photographer's names and run it past , who is a guru on copyright. Cheers, Peacemaker67  (click to talk to me) 05:00, 25 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated.--Catlemur (talk) 10:16, 26 January 2017 (UTC)

August Meyszner
Very good article. I note a few times towards the end, Wehrmacht is not in italics; I assume it should be to match earlier usage in the article; but, since its your baby so to speak, I wanted to leave it for you to decide; as you know there are arguments on both sides for using and not using italics for certain words, such as Wehrmacht and Waffen-SS. Cheers, Kierzek (talk) 19:37, 26 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, got them. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:58, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Kragujevac massacre
The article Kragujevac massacre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Kragujevac massacre for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:21, 27 January 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T8
The article Yugoslav torpedo boat T8 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav torpedo boat T8 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:21, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

References of Maximilian de Angelis
Hello Peacemaker67! In the edit summery of your edit you write "this source is used in FLs and FAs". Can you tell me what are FLs and FAs? Thanks a lot! --Coffee leaf (talk) 00:05, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, WP:Featured Lists and WP:Featured Articles. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:07, 28 January 2017 (UTC)
 * Ah, okay, thanks again. --Coffee leaf (talk) 12:19, 28 January 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter - February 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2017). This first issue is being sent out to all administrators, if you wish to keep receiving it please subscribe. Your feedback is welcomed.

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg NinjaRobotPirate • Schwede66 • K6ka • Ealdgyth • Ferret • Cyberpower678 • Mz7 • Primefac • Dodger67
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Briangotts • JeremyA • BU Rob13

Guideline and policy news
 * A discussion to workshop proposals to amend the administrator inactivity policy at Wikipedia talk:Administrators has been in process since late December 2016.
 * Pending changes/Request for Comment 2016 closed with no consensus for implementing Pending changes level 2 with new criteria for use.
 * Following an RfC, an activity requirement is now in place for bots and bot operators.

Technical news
 * When performing some administrative actions the reason field briefly gave suggestions as text was typed. This change has since been reverted so that issues with the implementation can be addressed. (T34950)
 * Following the latest RfC concluding that Pending Changes 2 should not be used on the English Wikipedia, an RfC closed with consensus to remove the options for using it from the page protection interface, a change which has now been made. (T156448)
 * The Foundation has announced a new community health initiative to combat harassment. This should bring numerous improvements to tools for admins and CheckUsers in 2017.

Arbitration
 * The Arbitration Committee released a response to the Wikimedia Foundation's statement on paid editing and outing.

Obituaries
 * JohnCD (John Cameron Deas) passed away on 30 December 2016. John began editing Wikipedia seriously during 2007 and became an administrator in November 2009.

Discuss this newsletter • Subscribe • Archive

13:38, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

January 2017 Military History Writers' Contest

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:26, 1 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T2
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yugoslav torpedo boat T2 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:02, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T4
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yugoslav torpedo boat T4 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:02, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Uprising in Serbia
Had a question about the Uprising in Serbia article but did not want to clutter up the talk page. My father was Miodrag Ivkovic and he served under Mihailović during the war. My son spotted his name in this article, but I believe it must be mere coincidence since the odds that my father was part of the communist party are somewhere between 0 and no freaking way, especially since he was part of Mihailović's group. Still, it's quite the coincidence. Do you happen to know where that list of people came from? I don't see a source quoted. Gray Knight (talk) 18:33, 2 February 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, I don't know anything about where that information came from. I suggest you raise it on the article talk page. It is possible that it is a coincidence, of course. There must have been more than one man with that name? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:01, 2 February 2017 (UTC)

Thanks! Gray Knight (talk) 15:18, 4 February 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXX, February 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 04:45, 7 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Mallow (K81)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Mallow (K81) 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 Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 13:01, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Invitation.
Hello Peacemaker67, I’m inviting you to have a look at the page Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Wikipedia Awards https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Wikipedia_Awards.

As this Project currently regarded as semi-active, and not visited by many Wikipedians, then I, as participant of this Project, decided to send the invitations to right people, who maybe interested in new Bravery Barnstar. The Editor Dennis Pietras offered the idea to create the Bravery Barnstar, and I did my best to help with design of this, as I think, much needed Barnstar; thus if you will appreciate both, the idea and the design, please, let other Editors know about that by writing words of support.

All the best. Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 23:13, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Mallow (K81)
The article HMS Mallow (K81) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Mallow (K81) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Parsecboy -- Parsecboy (talk) 13:01, 14 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T2
The article Yugoslav torpedo boat T2 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav torpedo boat T2 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav torpedo boat T4
The article Yugoslav torpedo boat T4 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav torpedo boat T4 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 02:41, 17 February 2017 (UTC)

AE
See here.TheTimesAreAChanging (talk) 01:45, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

German–Yugoslav Partisan negotiations for TFA
Hi Peacemaker. This is just a friendly note to let you know that the German–Yugoslav Partisan negotiations article, which you nominated at FAC, has been scheduled as today's featured article for March 11, 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/March 11, 2017. Thanks! — Chris Woodrich (talk) 02:56, 23 February 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Chris! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:08, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Comments
I think you had made several comments on this issue before. Can you comment here? Thank you! -O.R.Comms 04:33, 23 February 2017 (UTC)

Philip Cohen
Inserting forgeries in the quoted text in this article is serious violation of Wikipedia policies. Please, adhere to and respect Wikipedia policies.--178.221.129.26 (talk) 07:32, 25 February 2017 (UTC)
 * What Wikipedia policy says you can't use [sic] in a quotation? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:00, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

The WikiCup
As a WikiCup judge I have removed two of your recent submissions of GA reviews as being ineligible for points. That is not to say that they were not perfectly good reviews but that they were too short to qualify for points in the WikiCup. The rule in question states "Only reviews of a sufficient length will be counted; quick fails and very short reviews will generally not be awarded points." The reviews in question were this one and this one. Cwmhiraeth (talk) 18:42, 25 February 2017 (UTC)

March Madness 2017
G'day all, please be advised that throughout March 2017 the Military history Wikiproject is running its March Madness drive. This is a backlog drive that is focused on several key areas:


 * tagging and assessing articles that fall within the project's scope
 * updating the project's currently listed A-class articles to ensure their ongoing compliance with the listed criteria
 * creating articles that are listed as "requested" on the project's various task force pages or other lists of missing articles.

As with past Milhist drives, there are points awarded for working on articles in the targeted areas, with barnstars being awarded at the end for different levels of achievement.

The drive is open to all Wikipedians, not just members of the Military history project, although only work on articles that fall (broadly) within the military history scope will be considered eligible. More information can be found here for those that are interested, and members can sign up as participants at that page also.

The drive starts at 00:01 UTC on 1 March and runs until 23:59 UTC on 31 March 2017, so please sign up now.

For the Milhist co-ordinators. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) & MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 07:24, 26 February 2017 (UTC)

March 2017 WikiCup newsletter
And so ends the first round of the competition, with 4 points required to qualify for round 2. It would have been 5 points, but when a late entrant was permitted to join the contest in February, a promise was made that his inclusion would not result in the exclusion of any other competitor. To achieve this, the six entrants that had the lowest positive score of 4 points have been added to the 64 people who otherwise would have qualified. As a result, some of the groups have nine contestants rather than eight. Our top four scorers in round 1 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, last year's winner, led the field with two featured articles on birds and a total score of 674.
 * 🇪🇺 Iry-Hor, a WikiCup newcomer, came next with a featured article, a good article and a tally of 282 bonus points for a score of 517. All these points came from the article Nyuserre Ini, an Ancient Egyptian pharaoh,
 * 🇯🇵 1989, another WikiCup newcomer, was in joint third place at 240. 1989 has claimed points for two featured lists and one good article relating to anime and comedy series, all of which were awarded bonus points.
 * Peacemaker67 shared third place with five good articles and thirteen good article reviews, mostly on naval vessels. He is also new to the competition.

The largest number of DYKs have been submitted by Vivvt and The C of E, who each claimed for seven, and MBlaze Lightning achieved eight articles at ITN. Carbrera and Peacemaker67 each claimed for five GAs and Krishna Chaitanya Velaga was well out in front for GARs, having reviewed 32. No featured pictures, featured topics or good topics yet, but we have achieved three featured articles and a splendid total of fifty good articles.

So, on to the second round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is a good article candidate, a featured process, or anything 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 help keep down 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:52, 1 March 2017 (UTC)

Award.
Hello Peacemaker67,

With great pleasure I'm awarding you with this brand new Bravery Barnstar and I think, that you are the first Wikipedian, who received it. Best regards, Chris Oxford (talk) 14:45, 4 March 2017 (UTC)


 * Good on you, Chris! Thanks. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:08, 5 March 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXI, March 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:20, 12 March 2017 (UTC)

German–Yugoslav Partisan negotiations
Just to let you know about an article by Gaj Trifković titled "Making Deals with the Enemy: Partisan-German Contacts and Prisoner Exchanges in Yugoslavia, 1941–1945" (Global War Studies; 2013/8/1). He also wrote a dissertation on this topic. Regards, --Klemen Kocjancic (talk) 06:23, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the tip! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:24, 11 March 2017 (UTC)

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC) Thank you for the "controversial negotiations between the German forces in Yugoslavia and senior members of Tito's Partisans in March 1943 that went beyond prisoner swaps and drew the ire of the Comintern"! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:51, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks again Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:58, 11 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Your day again, make peace ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:10, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You did that fast, thank you ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:50, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Different question: would you have time to look at my FAC, with peace in the title? --Gerda Arendt (talk) 18:36, 12 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry Gerda, I'd like to, but it is completely outside my area of expertise... I don't know what I could contribute. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:37, 13 March 2017 (UTC)
 * You could say if an outsider can understand it ;) - it had several supports and excellent copy-editors before it derailed and was restarted, - so I look for fresh eyes. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:21, 13 March 2017 (UTC)

Hey
13:14, 16 March 2017 (UTC)Wilson young (talk)

Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao
Hey Peacemaker67,

If you're planning on GA nom-ing Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao anytime soon, I'd love to do it. It would be the last non "official" (I.e. A, FA or GA) classed article of the Yugoslavian navy (At least according to the Operation Bora progress table). -- Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  14:25, 15 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Iazyges. I was hoping to find some more information on her before a nom, but it looks like everything that is easily accessible (leaving aside sources in Italian) is in it. I'll have a last look shortly and let you know when I nom. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:12, 16 March 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, I've added a few bits and pieces and tweaked things, so hopefully it is all ready. Now nominated: Talk:Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:04, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao 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 Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 14:41, 17 March 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao
The article Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Yugoslav gunboat Beli Orao for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Iazyges -- Iazyges (talk) 02:02, 18 March 2017 (UTC)

7th Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the 7th Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia) article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 6 April 2017. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/April 6, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:12, 24 March 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:05, 24 March 2017 (UTC)

Bainsizza
Hello, I see that you are one of the users who applied to the Miramar Ship Index accounts. Could you check what it says about Bainsizza ' s demise for the ongoing discussion on Malcolm David Wanklyn? It would be of great help. --Olonia (talk) 12:11, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Svetozar Vukmanović
Hey, do you have anything on Svetozar Vukmanović? Apparently my ancestors personally knew him, so expanding his article would be great.--Catlemur (talk) 12:15, 25 March 2017 (UTC)

Greetings
I stumbled upon your name in the history of an article and then I saw that you were in my country when the scenery was not a pleasure for the eyes, so to say, and I just want to say hello and to wish all the best, nothing else. :) Greetings from Mostar. -- KWiki (talk) 01:08, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Cheers. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:29, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

TFA again
Thank you for 7th Army (Kingdom of Yugoslavia), "quickly cut off and encircled before surrendering". - In the pending list, I saw that you have something for 28 July, which is Bach's day of death for which I thought "peace and joy" would be suitable, but I saw yours I moved the other to next year. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:23, 6 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Gerda! I appreciate they are very different subjects and both are highly meritorious. No peace or joy at Gudovac on that day in 1941. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:33, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

Kragujevac massacre
Up fo a joint nomination? I reckon it easily meets all FA criteria. 23 editor (talk) 16:06, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sure, I was thinking the same thing. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:58, 7 April 2017 (UTC)

March Madness 2017
Griffth and the other are sabotaging Outland. They are edit warring. They don´t even know the movie.

And, regarding you, have you asked me what is going on?Arderich (talk) 09:01, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Cheers! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:51, 2 April 2017 (UTC)

Help required, please
It is still happening Gareth Griffith-Jones, The Welsh Buzzard  (Talk) 08:54, 8 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Have provided a warning. Let me know if it recurs? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

Griffith has been sabotaging Outland (movie). And he has been sending messages too, which I deleted (3 in total).Arderich (talk) 09:05, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

WWII in Yugoslavia and other Articles, Vandelism
Understood about edit warring. Though that user was engaged in vandelism across multiple Wiki pages. (Mass deleting, censoring, etc) I was undoing them. Looking at his edit history,you will see these are not in good faith. Though perhaps I should have reported the person sooner. I'll bring them to your attention if I see another one at it. Anyway, thanks for stepping in. Much appreciated. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 13:10, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXII, April 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 23:50, 8 April 2017 (UTC)

War memorials
Hey Peacemaker. Any chance I can bum a favour? Norwich War Memorial is at A-class (WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Norwich War Memorial) and seems to be struggling for input. It needs a third reviewer to get things moving so I can hopefully put it up at FAC and then get the next one in the queue nominated. I don't suppose you're up for the job? It's not a huge article so hopefully it won't take you very long. Thanks, HJ Mitchell  &#124; Penny for your thoughts?  17:31, 9 April 2017 (UTC)

Remove kebab redirect
Hi. I saw that you deleted the Remove kebab redirect, saying the deletion discussion closed as delete, but it seems that you didn't actually close it.  ~barakokula31  (talk)  12:10, 15 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that, got called away and forgot to tidy up. Thanks for the reminder. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:00, 16 April 2017 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

 * You are very kind, Krishna! Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:53, 20 April 2017 (UTC)

Continued Unexplained or unsourced edits
User IP 178.223.44.231 is once again continuing to vandelise and falsely edit aryicles. Like for example Collaboration with the Axis Powers during World War II I see you had to revert another one of his edits now in the Chetniks Wiki. I'm amazed this IP hasn't faced possible suspension yet.. Please take a quick look at this. Thank you. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 21:05, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * IP 178.233.44.231 I suspect goes by    IP 93.86.83.158 now. As the old one went quiet and this new one does the same bad faith edits. See List of wars involving Serbia, a highly POV article that is being tampered with. I tried to restore the article​ back to NPOV as it existed 7 months back before IPs started messing with it. I've given up on it so as to avoid another edit warring situation. When you have the time, please take a gander. Cheers. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 18:39, 16 April 2017 (UTC)
 * The list is essentially uncited. I suggest you start a thread on the talk page about an issue you see currently, focussing in on one area and trying to get discussion going. I've watchlisted and warned them about edit warring. Your warning stands, of course. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:37, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Understood, and much appreciated. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 09:45, 17 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Haha, 93.86.83.158 at the time (now 178.222.116.11 it seems) is back at it again, vandelising pages, deleting victims of genocide, revisonism etc, as you've seen. Person is still engaging in this behavior despite warning. I am convinced all three IPs are the same person as they all happen to use mobile editing and go to the same articles, while one stops, another IP begins. When you blocked 109, 178 just popped up. Is there something that can be done about this,some mod I can speak to? I don't want to keep bothering you over this. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 19:09, 26 April 2017 (UTC)

May 2017 WikiCup newsletter
The second round of the competition has now closed, with just under 100 points being required to qualify for round 3. YellowEvan just scraped into the next round with 98 points but we have to say goodbye to the thirty or so competitors who didn't achieve this threshold; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Our top scorers in round 2 were:


 * 🏴󠁧󠁢󠁳󠁣󠁴󠁿 Cas Liber, led the field with five featured articles, four on birds and one on astronomy, and a total score of 2049, half of which came from bonus points.
 * 🇯🇵 1989 was in second place with 826 points, 466 of which were bonus points. 1989 has claimed points mostly relating to anime and Japanese-related articles.
 * Peacemaker67 took third place with two FAs, one GA and seven GARs, mostly on naval vessels or military personnel, scoring 543 points.
 * Other contestants who scored over 400 points were Freikorp, Carbrera, and Czar. Of course all these points are now wiped out and the 32 remaining contestants start again from zero in round 3.

Vivvt submitted the largest number of DYKs (30), and MBlaze Lightning achieved 13 articles at ITN. Carbrera claimed for 11 GAs and Argento Surfer performed the most GARs, having reviewed 11. So far we have achieved 38 featured articles and a splendid 132 good articles. Commendably, 279 GARs have been achieved so far, more than double the number of GAs.

So, on to the third round. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed in round 3. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, 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 help keep down 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 13:16, 1 May 2017 (UTC)

Novi Sad raid
Hi, Peacemaker. If you have the time, would you care to assist over at Novi Sad raid? Its expansion would be much quicker that way and I find that our collaborations always make for very good quality articles. Your experience writing Hungarian occupation of Yugoslav territories ought to be helpful. So far, I've got about one-third done. 23 editor (talk) 00:11, 1 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I'd like to (glad you've added it to Bora), and will take a look if I get a chance. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:09, 2 May 2017 (UTC)

IP user is at it again.
178.222.116.11 is back undoing the edits you made at List of Wars Involving Serbia page. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 00:34, 5 May 2017 (UTC)
 * You can give him all the warnings you want, hehe. He doesn't read the talk page it seems. He's already been warned 4 times by 3 different users.... I'm amazed he wasn't blocked yet. People have been for much less...Though block him and he will just generat a new IP adress. Determined little house fly, he is. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 13:37, 6 May 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIII, May 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 03:02, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

"utter plonker"
WP:CIVILITY is a pillar of Wikipedia. I don't know to whom you are referring in your edit comment here:, but I would remind you not to insult anyone when editing, as this is detrimental to building an encyclopedia. LK (talk) 09:57, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * And I'd remind you not to editwar when you are wrongly applying a guideline that only applies to BLPs. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:36, 7 May 2017 (UTC)

Maurice Wilder-Neligan
Please don't do a drive by revert and run away. Join me on the talk page. LK (talk) 09:35, 6 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Mate, I wrote the article, I'm hardly going to run away. As far as I'm concerned, you did an incorrect BLP change (the guy died in 1923, so it isn't a BLP), and then edit-warred to keep your version. I'm glad you stopped and used the talk page. I'll make the suggested change. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:38, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


 * Writing the article doesn't give you dibs on it. From my point of view, you edit warred to keep a sentence that you wrote, that contradicted policy, without giving any reason for keeping it. Please give a reason to ignore stated policy, or it'll get removed, either by me or someone else. BTW, the policy I was referring to, MOS:BIO, applies to biographies of both living and dead. LK (talk) 09:59, 6 May 2017 (UTC)


 * If you actually stopped to read the policy, as I have pointed out on the talk page, you would know that you are misrepresenting it. It can't be any clearer. BTW, it was you who used the term BLP, not me. If you insist on carrying on like a pork chop, I'll take it to a drama board. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:57, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Ac! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:00, 8 May 2017 (UTC)

Orphaned non-free image File:Austro-Hungarian torpedo boat Tb 74 T.jpg
 Thanks for uploading File:Austro-Hungarian torpedo boat Tb 74 T.jpg. The image description page currently specifies that the image is non-free and may only be used on Wikipedia under a claim of fair use. However, the image is currently not used in any articles on Wikipedia. If the image was previously in an article, please go to the article and see why it was removed. You may add it back if you think that that will be useful. However, please note that images for which a replacement could be created are not acceptable for use on Wikipedia (see our policy for non-free media).

Note that any non-free images not used in any articles will be deleted after seven days, as described in section F5 of the criteria for speedy deletion. Thank you. --B-bot (talk) 17:05, 10 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Wilder-Neligan
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Maurice Wilder-Neligan 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 03:40, 17 May 2017 (UTC)

World War II in Yugoslavia Repeat Vandelism
User 178.222.116.11 has for the 5th time made the same unsourced deletion in article World War II in Yugoslavia despite warning from editors such as yourself. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 22:01, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Another user has dealt with the situation ;). Cheers 108.54.93.183 (talk) 23:14, 17 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Sorry about that. Have had enough drama for the moment. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:00, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Seeing the edit wars and agenda pushing some users are carrying out in the Balkan articles, I don't blame you for stepping away for a bit to reclaim some sanity. By the way, quick question, if you don't mind. What inspired you to focus on that region of history? 108.54.93.183 (talk) 20:58, 19 May 2017 (UTC)
 * By the way, IP 178.222.116.11 operates under 109.93.49.149. Popped up just as old IP went south. Similar editing style. Using mobile editor. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 02:22, 23 May 2017 (UTC)

Jozo Tomasevich
Peacemaker, I have been looking into Tomasevich's writings and wanted to know how much experience you have had with this historians work? Is he fairly unbiased, or does he skew towards Croatian/Serbian Nationalism or Pro-Yugoslavia? I am considering reading some of his books if they are reliable sources to gain a better understanding of WWII history in the region. Thanks 108.54.93.183 (talk) 23:50, 23 May 2017 (UTC)
 * I have a copy of both of Tomasevich's major works, on the Chetniks and on occupied Yugoslavia, focusing on the NDH. In my view, Tomasevich is one of the leading authorities on Yugoslavia in WWII, especially among those writing in English. All writers have a bias, but I believe he is pretty neutral and that he sticks to the facts. Ustasha and Chetnik apologists seem to dislike him, which indicates he has taken a balanced position. Academic reviewers seem to agree. It's only a shame that he died before completing his planned work on the Partisans. Steven Pavlowitch, Marko Attila Hoare, Sabrina Ramet and Matteo Milazzo are also very good. For the occupation arrangements in WWII Yugoslavia, Raphael Lemkin (the man who coined the term genocide) is excellent. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:45, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Ustasha and Chetnik apologists seem to dislike him? I think I'll pick up his books then. I'll check out the others you posted as well. Yeah, heard he got 75% of the Partisan volume​ finished. (Based on wiki bio) Would have been an intriguing read. Shame his daughter didn't have it published. Perhaps too much left to research.


 * What about Ivo Goldstein, David MacDonald or Marcus Tanner? These were others recommended to me by users previously. Do they seem credible or should I not bother? Saw some of them used as sources in Balkan Wiki articles. Thanks 108.54.93.183 (talk) 10:15, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * They are all pretty good too. I don't know Tanner well though. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:25, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, will definitely check out your recommendations. Reading your bio, I too share the common goal of understanding what makes the Southern Slavs tick in such a way. I am of Ex-Yugo descent myself but born 1st generation in The States. Can't begin to imagine what it was like to see first hand what happened in the 90s there. Thanks for volunteering to work on here. So far you seem to be one of the few editors on here that seems honest in intentions. Cheers 108.54.93.183 (talk) 20:43, 24 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I like to think so. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:11, 25 May 2017 (UTC)

June 1941 uprising in eastern Herzegovina scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the June 1941 uprising in eastern Herzegovina article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 23 June 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/June 23, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 15:08, 27 May 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:03, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Wilder-Neligan
The article Maurice Wilder-Neligan 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Maurice Wilder-Neligan for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 14:00, 28 May 2017 (UTC)

Duntroon and Australian Defence Force Academy
I don't get the difference in these two places. If Army cadets can go to either, what's the difference in the two programs? Pumpkin Sky  talk  14:02, 1 June 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day . Since 1986, cadets from all three services have had to go to ADFA to get a degree. Around their academic courses, these cadets go through single-service military training. After finishing three years there, Army cadets then do one year of military studies at Duntroon before being commissioned. The other path to commissioning in the Regular Army is to attend an eighteen month military-only course at Duntroon, which consists of six months initial training then the same twelve month course those that have attended ADFA do. Degrees are therefore no longer granted by Duntroon, only by ADFA (which is affiliated with UNSW). Any clearer? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:08, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Also, Duntroon is for Army officer cadets only. ADFA is a tri-service institution. Nick-D (talk) 04:11, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Not to contradict, but RAAF ADG officers also attend Duntroon for one year. Or they did when I was there, I assume it is still the same. Overall, though, Duntroon is an Army institution, while ADFA is tri-service. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Quite right Rupert. We had a couple of ADGies when I was there too. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 04:32, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Photomaterials for Articles.
Hello Peacemaker67,

I asked the question around, about the use of images in Wikipedia articles, but it looks, that this is not a simple one, as there are no instructions in regards of this particular question in the following guide: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Image_use_policy and it seems that it is not that easy to figure out the right answer. I know, that you wrote many good articles, enriched with right photo material, about notable people, and it would be really good to get your advice on this matter. I participated as one of the main contributors in the creation of the articles about two notable living people: a Greek archaeologist Elisavet Spathari and Australian artist Joanna Angelett, who is currently working in London, and I continue to improve the quality of these articles, and as I think that the articles without good photo material are incomplete and never can meet Wikipedia requirements for a Good Article, I'm trying to enrich these articles with photos of the persons, mentioned above and with photos related to their careers events. But that is not an easy task: due the fact that Elisavet Spathari is a Honorary Director Emeritus of Ministry of Culture in Greece, I appealed to this Ministry 3 times already with request to help with the photo of their Director for the Wikipedia article, but there is no answer from Greece yet, and as result this article is still remaining a stub-class rated one. From London, after several requests, I received the question about particular photos which they should send for the article, and here I asked myself: "Should I request only photos of events and art objects, which were mentioned in the article, or that can be photos of any significant event in career of this artist or of her important works, no matter whether they were mentioned in the article or not?" So, I replied that I will consult with my experienced colleagues - senior Editors - and then answer their question. I’ll greatly appreciate your advise.

By the way — best of luck with your article Maurice Wilder-Neligan.

Regards, Chris.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:02, 2 June 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day . It can be a fine line to determine what is relevant. I reckon as long as the image has a connection to the article subject, it is usually ok. For example, in a military biography, it can be ok to add an image from a battle in which the subject fought, even though the subject isn't actually depicted in the image. In the case of an artist, if they were inspired to paint a particular piece (or in general) by an event, then an image of that event may be ok to include. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:18, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

Great thanks, Peacemaker67, for the clear, logical answer. I assumed that it was necessary to approach this question exactly as you advised, but now I am totally confident that my assumptions were correct, so I can give a definite answer to their question. All the best. Regards, Chris.Chris Oxford (talk) 11:04, 3 June 2017 (UTC)

List of wars involving Serbia
Guy is back at it on List of wars involving Serbia after the page protection expired. Another user with a brand new account, Vuzz88 joined in. Funny every time he edits, he adds another 100,000 victims... Similar nonsense happening in List of wars involving Serbia in the Middle Ages. All edits unexplained, unsourced and by the same IP and Vuzz88. Person refuses to communicate on talk page. Upon receiving an edit war warning on their page, he just deletes it. Is there a certain outlet I should contact about this behavior? Otherwise the articles are at the mercy of vandels.108.54.93.183 (talk) 14:00, 4 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Peacemaker, the IP's edits were definitely not of good faith for they are POV, repeatedly same edits despite warning from multiple users. He will undo your reverting. As will be seen. 108.54.93.183 (talk) 02:47, 5 June 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXIV, June 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 12:52, 8 June 2017 (UTC)

Unhinged Editor
Peacemaker, I have a question about an editor who goes by "Quis separabit?" (Rms125a@hotmail.com). I noticed you have had rumbles mostly with him/her/it upon me looking over some talk pages to some Yugoslavia related articles (sorry if I brought up bad memories, hehe). Guy is undeniably vehemently anti-Croat, and anti-Bosnian, and strongly pro-Serbian (No matter what), leaving Serbian equivalents of "Mein Kampfs" everywhere, trying to whitewash or rewrite history, pushing their POV. Pretty much looking for excuses to support his bigoted views. How is someone as unhinged, biased and revolting as that user allowed to edit Balkan related articles? He seems totally against rational debates or any compromises. I have never quite seen anyone like him/her/it. Quite a disheartening read. If I didn't know better, I would have thought the person used to work for Milosevic's propaganda arm. Was something ever done about this user? 108.54.93.183 (talk) 21:33, 14 June 2017 (UTC)
 * We don't cross paths often. I don't recall any serious disagreements, but I've been on here a while now. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:57, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It was one in which they degraded one ethnic group or groups as moraly inferior, while being highly empathetic to another. They would justify mass murder of civilians as moral revenge. Ironic, he wants justice, but only for a select. His views seem based in a self created fantasy. Was just surprised someone that bigoted is allowed to edit on here. I was reading over Yugoslav talk pages, and the person who was using conspiracy blog sites as sources referenced these comments linked here that they made on your talk page. Which is why I came to you about them. How often do you come across such delusion? Admittedly, their dramatic outburts were entertaining. :) 108.54.93.183 (talk) 02:54, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Looking back, I can see that we have disagreed on some things, but haven't come across them recently. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:09, 15 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Good to hear. Perhaps they found their inner tranquility. ;) 108.54.93.183 (talk) 03:32, 15 June 2017 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for June 1941 uprising in eastern Herzegovina, introducing: "It was a significant revolt that preceded the communist-led uprising that occurred in Yugoslavia post the launching of Operation Barbarossa, and was in direct response to massacres of Serbs in eastern Herzegovina carried out by the fascist Ustaše regime in the Axis puppet state—the Independent State of Croatia."! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks again Gerda! Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:25, 23 June 2017 (UTC)

Image
Where, on this page, was the matter considered? The TFA coordinators prefer not to make such decisions, which is why Dank asked me to handle them.

Typically, a tentative image (often whatever accompanied the TFA request, particularly when Mike does the scheduling) is included. More often than not, it requires resizing, reformatting, replacement or removal.

To be clear, while I perform this task regularly, I don't mean to suggest that I possess any special authority. I'm addressing the statement quoted above, which seems to reflect an impression that Mike evaluated the image and deemed it suitable for use at TFA.

As you can see, I haven't undone your reversion. Instead, I've increased the thumbnail's size (though its subject remains difficult to discern) and added a caption (because the relevance of said subject is too narrow to mention in the blurb). The caption is far longer than usual, but without knowing whether the actual weapon shown (as opposed to others of its type) was used during the uprising, I don't see a good way to shorten it.

Incidentally, when reverting a Commons image's removal from the main page, please upload a local copy first or list it at WP:CMP and wait for KrinkleBot to transclude it at Commons:Auto-protected files/wikipedia/en. Otherwise, it might be unprotected (and vulnerable to replacement by a vandal) until KrinkleBot detects its use on Wikipedia's main page. (It took about three minutes in this instance, but it sometimes takes much longer and occasionally fails to occur altogether.) Thanks. —David Levy 08:23, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Not that it's my jurisdiction anymore, but I would have taken the view that the image wasn't suitable for the main page, since a reference to it can't be made in the blurb text, which is generally the rule of thumb for the relevancy of an image. BencherliteTalk 08:29, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks guys. I've never had an image deleted from a TFA before, so I found it very strange. I wasn't aware that a reference to the image had to be made in the blurb text, otherwise I would have made one or not used the image. Can you point to where that is a requirement? Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:38, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * It isn't a formal requirement. As Bencherlite noted, it's a rule of thumb.
 * Information shouldn't be included in a TFA blurb solely to justify an image's inclusion. That turns the logic on its head.  (In determining whether something is sufficiently relevant to the article's subject to serve as an appropriate illustration thereof, we look to the blurb to see whether it warrants a mention for that reason.)  We can include an image caption, so there's no benefit to forcing a minor detail into the blurb.  Its absence is an indication that the image probably isn't suitable, not a shortcoming in its own right.  —David Levy 12:53, 23 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Just to clarify, as David says I don't make changes to the TFA suggested image when scheduling from a request, or at least I haven't so far -- if an obviously unsuitable one were proposed I might do so. If there's a problem, others (usually David) address it as the TFA date approaches. Mike Christie (talk - contribs -  library) 18:47, 24 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for clarifying. I'll keep it in mind for future TFAs. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:14, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Wilder-Neligan
The article Maurice Wilder-Neligan 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Maurice Wilder-Neligan for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 03:41, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on
This is to inform you that an attempt is being made to overturn an RfC that you voted on (2 RfCs, actually, one less than six months ago and another a year ago). The new RfC is at:

Village pump (policy)

Specifically, it asks that "religion = none" be allowed in the infobox.

The first RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:


 * 15 June 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion infobox entries for individuals that have no religion.

The result of that RfC was "unambiguously in favour of omitting the parameter altogether for 'none' " and despite the RfC title, additionally found that "There's no obvious reason why this would not apply to historical or fictional characters, institutions etc.", and that nonreligions listed in the religion entry should be removed when found "in any article".

The second RfC that this new RfC is trying to overturn is:


 * 31 December 2015 RfC: RfC: Religion in infoboxes.

The result of that RfC was that the "in all Wikipedia articles, without exception, nonreligions should not be listed in the Religion= parameter of the infobox.".

Note: I am informing everyone who commented on the above RfCs, whether they supported or opposed the final consensus. --Guy Macon (talk) 03:21, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

GA
It would be nice to wait for a response before failing the article, I would have worked on it this week if you'd put it on hold. I don't think it is that far off from passing? I guess I can work on it and renominate it but I would appreciate it if you could do the review. During the last round, I worked off another editors comments and then they declined to do the full review when it was renominated - to answer your question, I think it is part of military history because in addition to what were most likely minor skirmishes, it is more significant as part of the background for the Wars of Roses. The Wars of Roses is a huge topic, I've worked on the article and it is very difficult because there is so much background leading up to it. These early disputes with the Nevilles (and also the Percys) are part of the larger Wars of Roses (and it's background, though it spills over into that conflict which the article discusses briefly)—in fact, it might be fair to include them as part of a series on the Wars of the Roses, if someone wanted to make an infobox. I came to the article myself while I was working on the main Wars of the Roses article, so I could better understand the underlying issues o what is a very complex war. Seraphim System ( talk ) 12:52, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * On another note about the Wars of the Roses, Joan and the House of Beaufort were descended from John of Gaunt's second wife, Katherine Swynford. Henry of Bolingbroke (King Henry IV) was descended from John's first wife, Blanche of Lancaster. Henry IV actually barred the Beauforts from the succession because they were originally illegitimate—they were legitimized after birth. Interestingly, during the Wars of the Roses, Westmorlands's full brother fought and died at the Battle of Towtown with the Lancaster king (Henry IV's grandson). The Beaufort-Nevilles sided with the Yorkist king. So, there were a lot of family rivaries and longstanding issues at play in the Wars of the Roses. I don't want to get too off-track in this article discussing it because it is extremely complicated - for example Joan's brother, Edmund, also fought with the Lancasters against the Yorkists. He was killed in the Battle of St. Albans, and his son blamed the Yorkists and Warwick (Warwick was Joan's grandson, Salisbury's son). Edmund originally became Duke of Somerset after his two older brothers died, but after his own death and his son's death (fighting against John Neville at the Battle of Hexham, Salisbury's younger son, who was given the hereditary Percy earldom of Northumberland as a reward) — well, long story short the surviving daughter of Edmund's older brother gave birth to the new king, Henry Tudor - and the war was over! My point here is the Wars of Roses is a conflict that goes on and on in it's details —  As the article says, Lander has written that if the Neville family had been united behind York their power would have been overwhelming. I don't want to get into too much in this article both because it is not the main article for the War or the Battles, but we have linked to those from this article. The main article fir the Wars is already a beast and it still doesn't cover everything. I think breaking it up and developing the ongoing side-conflicts, background articles and biographies is easily part of WPMILHIST. Thanks  Seraphim System  ( talk ) 14:27, 25 June 2017 (UTC)

One more issue, I am pinging to comment on this because it was raised during the review and I was not involved in the discussion, but I think I remember we decided to not refer to Ralph, 2nd earl as the heir because technically he was not the heir - the property transfers were done legally so we have followed the WP:RS and called it "disinheritence"  Seraphim System  ( talk ) 16:42, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the ping . It's an interesting experience to be told by a message at the top of the page to remain civil, when the editor whose page it is seems to identify as a baddass out of the Phoenix Project and / or Platoon :) all part, as they say, of life's rich tapestry. I'll only make a couple of comments here as SS has made a full justification (and unnecessarilly so IMHO) for the article's inclusion at WP:MILHIST; and its inclusion will remain unquestioned. There was in fact an heir to the earldom of Westmorland, it was John Neville d.1420 (predeceased his father, leaving a minor); it is the former who B36 correctly identifies as acquiesing to a certin degree in his own disinheritance.  The main thing that has really driven me to comment at these proceedings here is the fact that you failed it immediately, without any regard to the benefit that merely putting it on hold may bring.  Per WP:GA?, an immediate fail does not apply in any sense. I suggest this was a hasty move which should be undone, as both premature and unnecessary. Even so, on a closing note, it was certainly a quality review, in broad parts, and we do thank you for that. Enjoy the rest of your Sunday, both!  &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  17:57, 25 June 2017 (UTC)
 * The personal crack about my user page is obtuse and unnecessary. Don't make an inane comment because you are disappointed that an article you're working on isn't yet ready for GA. I'm a retired soldier so I put on a picture of myself in my younger days. That's all there is to it. Just so you're in the picture, I've GAN reviewed over 150 articles in my five years on en WP, on a wide range of subjects, and as far as I know there is only one active Milhist editor with more GAN reviews under their belt. I know a GA when I see one, as I also have nearly 60 GAs as well as 25 FAs that went through GAN. Neville-Neville feud currently isn't a GA. To clarify, when I first lightly read the article, seeing that it only lacked one citation and seemed to have a sensible top-level structure, I thought it might be close to GA, and that it was just a subject I know little about and would take a few readings to understand. On reflection and after several close readings, I decided it isn't. It needs a lot of work, not just tweaks here and there. It doesn't flow, is almost impossible to follow and some parts (the actual fighting or military action taken to seize lands etc) are apparently not even covered in the article. And even after that the lead will need to be rewritten. In those circumstances, I would not place an article on hold. It wasn't done in haste, or a quick fail, which I do very rarely, as I always like to give nominators some ideas for improvement, and I've given you a reasonable amount of things to get on with to improve it up to the required standard. But with this sort of over-reaction, you're headed straight to my list of editors whose articles I don't review. So well done on that, it's a short list. Good luck with improving the Neville-Neville feud and the other related articles, and best wishes for finding experienced editors willing to help you get them there. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:48, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I do apologise. It was merely intended to be a ligthearted quip, not a crushing personal attack: honestly no insult was intended (I was, for instance, toying with the examples of Apocalypse Now and Private Hudson- not sure they would have been any better!). And I certainly wasn't implying that because of an image, inWP:CIVILity should be tolerated. Take care! &mdash;  O Fortuna   semper crescis, aut decrescis  12:54, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

Serious
If you have intention to edit Josip Broz Tito in serious manner, we can close the point between two us: no discussion needed neither dispute. You can to see valid sources in my sandbox User:Forza bruta/sandbox. My sources are in Italian language but translation is simple with Google translator; other important source in Italian language is this: title 'Josip Broz Tito, il comunista più crudele di Stalin' means 'Josip Broz Tito, the communist more maleficent than Stalin'. I can find other thousands of sources which denounce atrocities and crimes made by Broz! The actual article on Broz is a ridicoulus caricature: 'benevolent dictator' is an insult to relatives of almost 1.000.000 victims of brutal dictator Broz! Titoist Yugoslavia's concentration camps is a my next article: in Goli otok 4.000 prisoners died!--Forza bruta (talk) 13:59, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * I am working on the body, in fits and starts, and am nearly up to WWII. I'm not that fussed about the lead at present, as it will get rewritten when I've finished the body to reflect the whole article. But in the meantime, please cite the material you are using properly, with a full citation to a reliable source in the References section and ensuring the material faithfully follows the source. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:21, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

Wikimedia Commons.
Hello Peacemaker67,

I sent to Australian designer a request for the images, intended for inclusion into the article, specifying required images type on your advise, by using a quote from your last reply: as long as the image has a connection to the article subject, it is usually ok , and surprisingly I received requested images just in two weeks' time: this happened after a year of inquiries and explanations, so in future I will always use your words to obtain necessary photo materials for the articles. Together with the images I received confirmation, that copyrights for them belong to the designer, and I've been granted permission to use these images under terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-Sharealike 3.0 Unported License - the type of licence, which I recommended in my latest email to designer. And the requested contact email address, that (as I think) should be presented on Commons, has also been included. So, now I’m equipped with all required components, but I’m not sure how should I use them correctly. As I understand, when I'll be uploading images to Commons, I should place in the comments box the text, proving that the permission to use these images has been granted, and also the contact email address of copyright holder, shouldn't I? Or should this data be given only at the request of other Wikipedians?

Regards, Chris OxfordChris Oxford (talk) 22:07, 26 June 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day Chris, have a look at WP:DCM which explains how to go through the OTRS process to have the licence registered. If, in the future, someone wants to check the licence info, they can contact OTRS to confirm. That way the privacy of the donator is maintained. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:33, 26 June 2017 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67, yes, I did, great thanks to you: on the page you pointed to I found all the answers. Sure, now job will be done correctly. All the very best, Chris Oxford.Chris Oxford (talk) 21:37, 27 June 2017 (UTC)

WikiCup 2017 July newsletter
The third round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 288 points being required to qualify for round 4. It was a hotly competitive round with all but four of the contestants exceeding the 106 points that was necessary to proceed to round 4 last year. Coemgenus and Freikorp tied on 288, and both have been allowed to proceed, so round 4 now has one pool of eight competitors and one of nine.

Round 3 saw the achievement of a 26-topic Featured topic by MPJ-DK as well as 5 featured lists and 13 featured articles. PanagiotisZois and SounderBruce achieved their first ever featured articles. Carbrera led the GA score with 10, Tachs achieved 17 DYKs and MBlaze Lightning 10 In the news items. There were 167 DYKs, 93 GARs and 82 GAs overall, this last figure being higher than the number of GAs in round 2, when twice as many people were taking part. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 4, we say goodbye to the fifteen or so competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, a featured process, or anything else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down 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. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 05:37, 30 June 2017 (UTC)

119.40.109.230


Hi,

Thanks for taking a look into this IP's edits. However, I would like to point out that you only blocked them for 3 days, when the previous block was for 1 year, and they continued vandalizing just two days after that block expired. And looking at the block log, the blocks have escalated pretty consistently overtime in duration. Would you be willing to increase the block duration? Thanks. 97.91.220.48 (talk) 03:55, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Quite so, I missed a step there. Blocked for two years. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:56, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Wilder-Neligan
The article Maurice Wilder-Neligan you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Maurice Wilder-Neligan for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 08:21, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXV, July 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 07:34, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Phillip Davey
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Phillip Davey 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 Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 13:20, 4 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – July 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (June 2017).

Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Happyme22 • Dragons flight
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Zad68

Guideline and policy news
 * The RFC discussion regarding WP:OUTING and WMF essay about paid editing and outing (see more at the ArbCom noticeboard archives) is now archived. Milieus #3 and #4 received support; so did concrete proposal #1.

Technical news
 * Fuzzy search will soon be added to Special:Undelete, allowing administrators to search for deleted page titles with results similar to the search query. You can test this by adding ?fuzzy=1 to the URL, as with Special:Undelete?fuzzy=1. Currently the search only finds pages that exactly match the search term.
 * A new bot will automatically revision delete unused file versions from files in Category:Non-free files with orphaned versions more than 7 days old.

Miscellaneous
 * A newly revamped database report can help identify users who may be eligible to be autopatrolled.
 * A potentially compromised account from 2001–2002 attempted to request resysop. Please practice appropriate account security by using a unique password for Wikipedia, and consider enabling two-factor authentication. Currently around 17% of admins have enabled 2FA, up from 16% in February 2017.
 * Did you know: On 29 June 2017, there were 1,261 administrators on the English Wikipedia – the exact number of administrators as there were ten years ago on 29 June 2007. Since that time, the English Wikipedia has grown from 1.85 million articles to over 5.43 million.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

Apr to Jun 17 Milhist article reviewing

 * Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:38, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

Macedonian edits
I'd love to know more about editing and wikipedia. It is so frustrating to me to see the names and histories of our national hero's constantly referred to as Bulgarian, or Greek, or anything but what they were and who they fought to be recognised as. My Grandmother was raised an orphan after her parents were murdered when her village was burnt down by the Greeks, so this is infuriating. All the present day 'Fyrom' business is a disgrace. It's a slap in the face to our people. In this day Nd age when there is such an emphasis on self determination, equality, anti racism, it seems everyone but the Macedonians are Porte ted. We are a free for all. So yes, I want to learnt more about wikipedia editing, much more, and continue replace the lies with truth! MishyMashy (talk) 12:30, 10 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I'm pleased you want to learn more. I encourage you to ask questions and familiarise yourself with WP policies and guidelines as you go. WRT Macedonia, it is important to use the contemporary locations etc. referring to someone born in 1914 as being born in Macedonia just isn't right in a historical sense. Macedonia is such a fraught area on WP that there was a Arbitration Committee case just about it, which was later expanded to the whole Balkans (for reasons I'm sure you'd understand). My advice is, follow what the reliable sources say about the person in question. They may have identified as Macedonian, but equally, they may have identified as Bulgarian, for example. We just follow what the sources say about ethnicity and nationality, and reflect the historical situation, not the current one (unless of course we are talking about the current situation). Good luck with your editing! Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 20:35, 10 July 2017 (UTC)

IP User:45.48.31.240


Hi Peacemaker67, This is an urgent message regarding IP User:45.48.31.240. The IP user kept on "adding content" via mobile edit that's considered WP:NOTTABLOID for it's IP tabloidery and vandalism, and this is avoid an edit war. I know you block the IP User:45.48.31.240 for 24 hours because that's not enough. For my request could you block User:45.48.31.240 again for another three days I know that the IP has sent the warning message and IP has continuously ignored the warnings. Thanks for the urgent message and reply me back as soon as you can. Thanks. 209.53.181.69 (talk) 20:49, 9 July 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  21:45, 9 July 2017 (UTC) — Berean Hunter   (talk)  19:13, 15 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I've hardblocked for one year because they are at a persistent static IP. To be unblocked, they will have to begin communicating for starters and giving us reassurances that they won't continue with edit warring.
 * Thanks for taking care of this, . Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:55, 14 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Happy to be of assistance.

Your GA nomination of Phillip Davey
The article Phillip Davey 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Phillip Davey for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 10:40, 16 July 2017 (UTC)

Raid at Ozbalt edit suggestions
g'day Peacemaker67,

Ralph Churches was my father. He was mightily chuffed to see your piece on his adventure before he passed three years ago. His only issue was with what he called the fairy tale spun by Walter Gossner.

Last November I got an email from a UK based production company contracted to Channel 4 to make a documentary series about escapes from fascist Europe, Dad's being one of them. To be part of that shoot was a delight, I got to meet a couple of partisans who remember Dad well. The documentary company, Seadog Productions managed to track down the son of Capt Jack Saggers who was the British liaison at Semic. Saggers' son provided them with his father's log book for the operation which lists everyone's arrival date in Semic, where they are from and when they were airlifted out. So for the first time I have a complete list of all escapees. Just as important is the fact that Walter Gossner is listed in this log book in the line below Les Laws, arriving on the same day, flown out with the others. Later the log book does note the arrival several days later of the men who were separated in the ambush but made it to Semic eventually.

I hope you find this of interest, I am happy to provide photos of the relevant logbook pages if you wish to see them.

Thanks again for giving my father so much pleasure

Best regards

Neil Churches

Danaesidh (talk) 08:25, 19 July 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day Neil. What a great experience! I met your Dad briefly at an ex-POW get-together at Torrens Parade Ground a few years back, and had found a signed copy of his book at my local secondhand bookshop, as I was quite intrigued. I'm pleased that he enjoyed reading the article. It is one of those few areas where my interests in Yugoslavia in WWII and in Australian military history have coincided. It seemed to me that your Dad was a bit hard done-by only getting the BEM for his exploits, but such are the vagaries of service. Did you know that successful escapees in WWI were awarded the MM? As an aside, Gossner's story seemed a bit off the mark, but we use the available sources, so I felt I had to include it but say that the reason for it being so different wasn't clear. I'd love copies of the pages of the logbook to set the record straight. You can email them to me using the "Email this user" link on the left. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:38, 19 July 2017 (UTC)

Congratulations!

 * Thanks Rupert. For all you do in keeping Milhist running. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:07, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

Redirects for discussion/Log/2017 July 19
Would you mind restoring the redirect and reopening the discussion? You closed this less than 24 hours after the discussion was opened, and the usual listing period for RFD is 7 days. Thanks, f  e  minist  16:40, 20 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I thought it was obviously an obscure typo, and unnecessarily bureaucratic to leave it for 7 days. But ok. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:33, 20 July 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Maurice Wilder-Neligan
IronGargoyle (talk) 12:56, 21 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the article, and for the great hook! It made our DYK stats page! Yoninah (talk) 19:06, 22 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks! My first. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:08, 22 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Phillip Davey
The article Phillip Davey you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Phillip Davey for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Krishna Chaitanya Velaga -- Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (talk) 14:21, 23 July 2017 (UTC)

Help with getting article to FA standards
Hey, I was looking for advice on if my Iazyges article is ready for FAC. I nominated it in the past, and was pointed to some signifcant areas to adress. I believe I have done so. The articles has almost doubled in size (by bytes) between when I nominated it for FAC and now. Old vs. Current. I was wondering if you would be willing to look over the article and tell me if you think it is ready for FAC, or if there is significant issues that would block it, and if so what they are. Thanks! -- Iazyges   Consermonor   Opus meum  03:37, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * G'day, happy to take a look, but have you considered a peer review? Or has it already been through one. I used PR a bit early on, and it can be really helpful for tightening up an article before FAC nom. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:42, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

TFA
Thank you for another, in the "series of Austro-Hungarian/Yugoslav river monitors. As the Austro-Hungarian Temes-class monitor Bodrog, she fired the first shots of World War I. She then went on to serve in three more navies under the name Sava, being scuttled and raised twice. She still exists, although she has been reduced from her former glory and is now an ammunition barge!" --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:54, 28 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks again, Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:20, 28 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bill McCann
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bill McCann 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 Abraham, B.S. -- Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:01, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bill McCann
The article Bill McCann 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 needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Bill McCann for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Abraham, B.S. -- Abraham, B.S. (talk) 14:41, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Yugoslav torpedo boat T3 scheduled for TFA
This is to let you know that the Yugoslav torpedo boat T3 article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 23 August 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Today's featured article/August 23, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:10, 29 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks Mike! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:48, 29 July 2017 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bill McCann
The article Bill McCann you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bill McCann for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Abraham, B.S. -- Abraham, B.S. (talk) 14:01, 30 July 2017 (UTC)

Administrators' newsletter – August 2017
News and updates for administrators from the past month (July 2017). Administrator changes
 * Gnome-colors-list-add.svg Anarchyte • GeneralizationsAreBad • Cullen328 (first RfA to reach WP:300)
 * Gnome-colors-list-remove.svg Cprompt • Rockpocket • Rambo's Revenge • Animum • TexasAndroid • Chuck SMITH • MikeLynch • Crazytales • Ad Orientem

Guideline and policy news
 * Following a series of discussions around new pages patrol, the WMF is helping implement a controlled autoconfirmed article creation trial as a research experiment, similar to the one proposed in 2011. You can learn more about the research plan at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial. The exact start date of the experiment has yet to be determined.
 * A new speedy deletion criterion, regarding articles created as a result undisclosed paid editing, is currently being discussed (permalink).
 * An RfC (permalink) is currently open that proposes expanding WP:G13 to include all drafts, even if they weren't submitted through Articles for Creation.

Technical news
 * LoginNotify should soon be deployed to the English Wikipedia. This will notify users when there are suspicious login attempts on their account.
 * The new version of XTools is nearing an official release. This suite of tools includes administrator statistics, an improved edit counter, among other tools that may benefit administrators. You can report issues on Phabricator and provide general feedback at mw:Talk:XTools.

Discuss this newsletter

Subscribe

Archive Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 00:12, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

Bill McCann
Hi, I just wanted to drop by and say great work on this article - it looks terrific. I wanted to make a small suggestion about the Boothby run in 1929 - I don't think Senator Elliott needs mentioning there. I mean, a Nationalist senator went to support a Nationalist candidate - that is what happens in election campaigns. I can't see how it's at all significant. But once again, great work with the article and good luck with the GAN. Frickeg (talk) 03:09, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I did wonder about mentioning Pompey, but I think it's ok, it goes to show that some soldiers were successful in getting elected to Parliament in the interwar period. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:35, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * But it's a completely insignificant detail subject to routine coverage. McCann's article doesn't need to show that some soldiers made it into parliament, only that he didn't. If you really want a mention of a successful soldier-politician, it would be better to mention that McCann was only the candidate because Jack Duncan-Hughes (and also Senator Alexander McLachlan, not a soldier) declined to run. Frickeg (talk) 06:50, 30 July 2017 (UTC)
 * I think you've misunderstood the intent of WP:ROUTINE here, which is about the notability of an event in order to have an article of its own. It doesn't refer to details within an article about a notable person. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:40, 1 August 2017 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXXXVI, August 2017
The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here. If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 13:38, 7 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Bill McCann
Hello! Your submission of Bill McCann at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Jupitus Smart  13:42, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Phillip Davey
Alex ShihTalk 00:03, 10 August 2017 (UTC)

DYK for Bill McCann
Vanamonde (talk) 01:18, 16 August 2017 (UTC)