User talk:Pickersgill-Cunliffe/Archive 1

Welcome!
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe! I noticed your contributions and wanted to welcome you to the Wikipedia community. I hope you like it here and decide to stay.

As you get started, you may find this short tutorial helpful:

Alternatively, the contributing to Wikipedia page covers the same topics.

If you have any questions, we have a friendly space where experienced editors can help you here:

If you are not sure where to help out, you can find a task here:

Please remember to sign your messages on talk pages by typing four tildes ( ~ ); this will automatically insert your username and the date.

Happy editing! MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Minerva(1805)2.png
Thanks for uploading File:Minerva(1805)2.png. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:45, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Unspecified source/license for File:Minerva(1805).jpg
Thanks for uploading File:Minerva(1805).jpg. The image has been identified as not specifying the copyright status of the image, which is required by Wikipedia's policy on images. Even if you created the image yourself, you still need to release it so Wikipedia can use it. If you don't indicate the copyright status of the image on the image's description page, using an appropriate copyright tag, it may be deleted some time after the next seven days. If you made this image yourself, you can use copyright tags like (to release all rights),  (to require that you be credited), or any tag here - just go to the image, click edit, and add one of those. If you have uploaded other images, please verify that you have provided copyright information for them as well.

For more information on using images, see the following pages:
 * Image use policy
 * File copyright tags

This is an automated notice by MifterBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Media copyright questions. NOTE: Once you correct this, please remove the tag from the image's page. --MifterBot (Talk • Contribs • Owner) 18:46, 5 March 2021 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: HMS Minerva (1805) has been accepted
 HMS Minerva (1805), which you submitted to Articles for creation, has been created.

Congratulations, and thank you for helping expand the scope of Wikipedia! We hope you will continue making quality contributions.

Since you have made at least 10 edits over more than four days, you can now create articles yourself without posting a request. However, you may continue submitting work to Articles for creation if you prefer.

If you have any questions, you are welcome to ask at the  [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Articles_for_creation/Help_desk&action=edit&section=new&nosummary=1&preload=Template:AfC_talk/HD_preload&preloadparams%5B%5D=HMS_Minerva_(1805) help desk] . Once you have made at least 10 edits and had an account for at least four days, you will have the option to create articles yourself without posting a request to Articles for creation.

If you would like to help us improve this process, please consider.

Thanks again, and happy editing! KylieTastic (talk) 15:16, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXX, April 2021
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) 02:09, 18 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Triton (1796)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Triton (1796) 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 Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 01:21, 21 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Triton (1796)
The article HMS Triton (1796) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Triton (1796) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:21, 30 April 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Artois (1794)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Artois (1794) 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 Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:41, 16 May 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXI, May 2021
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) 00:57, 22 May 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXII, June 2021
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) 03:06, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Caroline (1795)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Caroline (1795) 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 Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Artois (1794)
The article HMS Artois (1794) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Artois (1794) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:21, 27 June 2021 (UTC)

Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun! Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping.

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from, SuggestBot's caretaker. -- SuggestBot (talk) 16:42, 25 July 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIII, July 2021
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) 12:30, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Caroline (1795)
The article HMS Caroline (1795) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Caroline (1795) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:21, 9 August 2021 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the review!
Thanks for the work you put into the very detailed review of John Solomon Cartwright. I appreciated your comments, which made the article better. Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 15:23, 14 August 2021 (UTC)


 * By the way, I was amused to see the quote from Bagot on the front page of your homepage, since he plays a role in the Cartwright article! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:39, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * He does indeed! That quote jumped out at me from a book on British country houses of all things; I'm not actually sure why I adore it so much but I really do. On the other hand, any man with a quintuple barrelled surname is a blubber-head in my book! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:23, 14 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the inquiry as to why Cartwright won his seat in the 1836 election. I've found more information on it.  He appears to have benefitted from the Tory "sweep" in the election.  I've added one cite to support that, and have an idea where to find a more general cite in support. Also, I've nominated the article for DYK, and it's passed the first level of review:  Template talk:Did you know/Approved (dated August 18).  Thanks again for your assistance! Mr Serjeant Buzfuz (talk) 17:38, 24 August 2021 (UTC)
 * Interesting stuff! Glad I could help; looking forward to seeing the DYK. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:14, 25 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thames-class frigate
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thames-class frigate 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 05:01, 21 August 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thames-class frigate
The article Thames-class frigate you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thames-class frigate for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 10:21, 23 August 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXIV, August 2021
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) 15:49, 28 August 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations open
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:59, 1 September 2021 (UTC)

Sir John Savage John Savage (soldier)
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe. I noticed that you left a review for the article I had requested an assessment for. Although I reject the stated reasoning for it remaining as a C class article, ie that there were entire paragraphs that remained unreferenced. As I could only find two short sentences without references. One of which referred to established facts surrounding a historical figure other than the one that the article was dealing with (Bishop Bonner). These sentences have now been referenced, however. Are there any other issues which need resolving? Best Regards, Grosseteste (talk) 17:37, 9 September 2021 (UTC)


 * My apologies for being loose in my language, I more meant the ends of the paragraphs in question rather than the paragraphs in their entirety. I could have been clearer. I'd say the only other issues are reference-based. The Breverton, Baldwin, On the Laws, Bentley Smith, Campbell (some), and Wright references are all missing page numbers. The William Cope references are also missing page numbers but being a primary source I don't know if they even exist to be noted. If those get implemented I can't see a reason why this can't be B-class.
 * On a side note, if you have the time I think the article would also benefit from the reference style being harmonized throughout - it's not an issue if you don't use something like Template:Sfnp for references but whatever format you do use should be used throughout (for example, some references provide the publisher's details - which isn't required considering you've already got them in the bibliography - while others don't). Regards, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:55, 9 September 2021 (UTC)


 * No apology needed my friend, just a request for a clarification incase I had missed something. I hadn't noticed that so many references were missing page numbers. Some were references not made by myself and thus I have now removed and replaced some that I was unable to find page numbers for. The William Cope source does indeed lack page numbers but all others should now have page numbers associated and all references are now in the same format as far I could tell. Best Regards, Grosseteste (talk) 23:46, 9 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Looks better to me - reference 42, "Kendall", doesn't direct/link to anything though, and isn't in the bibliography. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 11:19, 10 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Well noticed, I'm not actually sure where that reference came from or what it referred to. So I have replaced it with the contemporary account by Vergil. Best Regards, Grosseteste (talk) 11:54, 10 September 2021 (UTC)
 * Great. I've updated the class of the article. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:22, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Fantastic, thank you very much for all your assistance. Are the 'WikiProject Biography / Military' done by a different group? Grosseteste (talk) 19:26, 10 September 2021 (UTC)


 * That's WikiProject Biography. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:55, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nomination period closing soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are still open, but not for long. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! No further nominations will be accepted after that time. Voting will commence on 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:43, 10 September 2021 (UTC)

Autopatroller
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, thanks for writing those admirable articles on Admirals. I have made your account wp:Autopatrolled as I think you are more than ready for this userright. Happy Editing  Ϣere Spiel  Chequers  23:34, 13 September 2021 (UTC)


 * Thanks very much! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 23:44, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

WikiProject Military history coordinator election voting has commenced
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Appropriate questions for the candidates can also be asked. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 04:40, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Benjamin William Page
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Benjamin William Page 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 05:21, 15 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Benjamin William Page
The article Benjamin William Page 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:Benjamin William Page for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 05:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Benjamin William Page
The article Benjamin William Page you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Benjamin William Page for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 13:41, 17 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Dowhill Castle
Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 21 September 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXXV, September 2021
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) 14:00, 22 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Henry Hart (Royal Navy officer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Henry Hart (Royal Navy officer) 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 Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:41, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Henry Hart (Royal Navy officer)
The article Henry Hart (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Henry Hart (Royal Navy officer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Benjamin William Page
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 25 September 2021 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting period closing soon
Hey y'all, voting for the 2021 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche will be closing soon. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2021. Voting will be conducted at the 2021 tranche page itself. Thanks, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 02:33, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

DYK for John Wells (Royal Navy officer)
— Maile (talk) 12:03, 26 September 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Peter Rainier (Royal Navy officer, born 1784)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Peter Rainier (Royal Navy officer, born 1784) 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:41, 29 September 2021 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Hog Farm Talk 05:02, 1 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Peter Rainier (Royal Navy officer, born 1784)
The article Peter Rainier (Royal Navy officer, born 1784) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Peter Rainier (Royal Navy officer, born 1784) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 03:21, 9 October 2021 (UTC)

Royal Navy wreck in the Baltic
Hi P-C, thought this might be of interest? Broichmore (talk) 10:30, 15 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Wow, that's an amazing find. I wonder how sure they are that it's actually Royal Navy - I didn't think coppering was that rare? Very interested to see if they can further identify it, considering how much of it seems to be left. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2021 (UTC)


 * Wonder if it's HMS Fancy, foundered 1811? Broichmore (talk) 13:02, 15 October 2021 (UTC)
 * @Broichmore I thought I'd check Grocott's Shipwrecks of the Revolutionary & Napoleonic Eras and he argues that Fancy didn't actually go down anywhere in the Baltic, and that this information was mistakenly copied over by Clowes, Norie, Steel, etc. He uses two letters from Robert Otway to demonstrate that she actually sank off Montrose while on the Leith Station, so it's probably not her. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:28, 15 October 2021 (UTC)

Rainiers
Hi, thanks for your comments on the new John Spratt Rainier article. Both he and his uncle have memorials in St Mary's Church, Sandwich (now used as an art gallery) – with my photos added to each article. The next time I am there, probably in the new year, I will check for any other Rainier memorials for use on Wiki. Hsq7278 (talk) 21:27, 17 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Hsq7278 thanks, I'd be especially interested if there's anything present on Peter Rainier the younger, but I'm sure the family has much more of interest to find. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:48, 17 October 2021 (UTC)

Noted - I will let you know if I find anything. Hsq7278 (talk) 07:50, 18 October 2021 (UTC)

HMS Blake
Hi PC, I'm fairly certain that File:Thomas Buttersworth - H.M.S. Blake, 74 Guns, leaving Port Royal, Jamaica - NYR.jpg is HMS Blake (1808) rather than Blake (1819), or at least I'd like it to be. Do you know of anything that would tie it down? Broichmore (talk) 16:15, 20 October 2021 (UTC)


 * @Broichmore a tricky one. Winfield doesn't record any Jamaica/Leeward Islands service for either ship. 1808 Blake seems to have been very busily employed off the coast of Spain for the majority of her career until being laid up. She was recommissioned by a lieutenant in 1814 for what duties I don't know, but this art gallery seems to believe that she went to the caribbean after this, suggesting it's her. Not sure how reliable that is though! For Blake 1819 the only service recorded between renaming and breaking up is her becoming a receiving ship at Portsmouth in 1823. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:00, 20 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer) 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 18:21, 21 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer)
The article Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer) 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:Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 05:41, 23 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer)
The article Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Samuel Jackson (Royal Navy officer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 13:21, 25 October 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXV, October 2021
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, 26 October 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sir George Walker, 1st Baronet
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sir George Walker, 1st Baronet 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 Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 19:40, 28 October 2021 (UTC)

book
Gardiner Broichmore (talk) 12:13, 3 November 2021 (UTC)


 * @Broichmore That's fabulous! Thanks very much for bring this to my attention. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:33, 3 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Sir George Walker, 1st Baronet
The article Sir George Walker, 1st Baronet you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sir George Walker, 1st Baronet for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 20:21, 5 November 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVI, November 2021
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) 11:26, 30 November 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Storming of Shelford House
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Storming of Shelford House 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:21, 8 December 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Storming of Shelford House
The article Storming of Shelford House you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Storming of Shelford House for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 11:21, 18 December 2021 (UTC)

DYK for Storming of Shelford House
— Maile (talk) 12:02, 20 December 2021 (UTC)


 * theleekycauldron (talk • contribs) (they/she) 01:23, 21 December 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer) 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 Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 18:21, 22 December 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer)
The article Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Charles Richardson (Royal Navy officer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 20:01, 26 December 2021 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, December 2021
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) 13:10, 30 December 2021 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gerard Gosselin
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gerard Gosselin 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 19:41, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gerard Gosselin
The article Gerard Gosselin 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:Gerard Gosselin for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 20:21, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gerard Gosselin
The article Gerard Gosselin you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gerard Gosselin for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 21:01, 3 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Resistance (1782)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Resistance (1782) 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 05:01, 7 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Resistance (1782)
The article HMS Resistance (1782) 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:HMS Resistance (1782) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 13:01, 9 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Resistance (1782)
The article HMS Resistance (1782) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Resistance (1782) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 15:01, 13 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of James Nicoll Morris
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article James Nicoll Morris 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:00, 18 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Joseph Ellison
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Joseph Ellison 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 Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 05:21, 23 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Joseph Ellison
The article Joseph Ellison you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Joseph Ellison for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 04:41, 24 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dowhill Castle
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dowhill Castle 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 Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 21:41, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dowhill Castle
The article Dowhill Castle 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:Dowhill Castle for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 22:40, 27 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dowhill Castle
The article Dowhill Castle you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dowhill Castle for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Jens Lallensack -- Jens Lallensack (talk) 06:41, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Christopher Chowne
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Christopher Chowne 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 Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 09:21, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, January 2022
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) 09:45, 30 January 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Christopher Chowne
The article Christopher Chowne 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:Christopher Chowne for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 23:41, 2 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Christopher Chowne
The article Christopher Chowne you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Christopher Chowne for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 10:41, 3 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of James Nicoll Morris
The article James Nicoll Morris you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:James Nicoll Morris for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 02:21, 7 February 2022 (UTC)

DYK for HMS Swallow (1745)
valereee (talk) 00:03, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Not certain if your aware of its existence, but do you prefer this version of HMS Swallow on a stamp? --Broichmore (talk) 13:45, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Per this discussion I think the image in use was taken from this stamp, with it being cropped to provide a more focused portrait of the ship (and Carteret's face!). Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:51, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I have a copy of the original engraving of the Cartaret portrait, but I don't have any provenance or confirmed PD date for it. Cant use it. A Jane Ashelford book features it on the cover. If you have the book, does it identify it? --Broichmore (talk) 15:08, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * I haven't come across the book you mention, and am in fact not sure what it is. Could you provide more details? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:35, 8 March 2022 (UTC)
 * It's PHILIP DE CARTERET R.N.: Jersey’s exceptional but forgotten explorer, by Jane Ashelford, also on Amazon at £3.99. --Broichmore (talk) 13:37, 9 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Unfortunately we dont have any provenance for this portrait either. --Broichmore (talk) 14:43, 10 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, when I get back to finishing off Swallow (hopefully soon!) I'll have a check of the book. I would assume that the latter portrait is in French hands from the description at least; certainly haven't seen it elsewhere. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:24, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Good. I've managed to get a sighting of the stamp picture back to 1931. Need earlier than that though.--Broichmore (talk) 12:56, 13 March 2022 (UTC)

Henry Lidgbird Ball
You failed GA review on this article, I’ve updated it to your suggestions so was just wondering if you’d give it a check over before I nominate it for GA again. --Knightmare 3112 (talk) 21:27, 17 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I'd be happy to do so. I think it's only fair that I finish the GA review I'm currently doing first, but will endeavour to get some comments on Ball's talk page ASAP. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:35, 17 February 2022 (UTC)

Fredericksburg
Any thoughts about potential A-Class here? Hog Farm Talk 20:58, 22 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I won't comment on the need for further copyediting or the like because frankly I'm rather bad at it and don't trust my own judgement! It's certainly the most comprehensive of your ship articles that I've reviewed, and the coverage seems to be about as complete as it could be. A bit of a strange point here, but as a non-American with no formal education in the ACW, I did find myself a little confused as to the geography of the river and of the location of the various forts and stations on it. I don't know whether you think you may be able to provide further clarifications on those matters with other sources, but did at times find myself wishing for a map with the locations of City Point, Trent Reach, Drewry's Bluff, Fort Brady, etc, on it.
 * Past that I think a little more context behind her construction and the "Ladies Gunboats" might also be useful inclusions if possible. Other minor points probably also exist that I can't easily identify because of my lack of expertise, but one I do note is Mitchell's rank, which seems in some articles to be commodore instead of captain, and another is Fredericksburg's possible use as flagship at least during the Battle of Trent's Reach. I am rather clutching at straws here! It might also be interesting to note where the squadron was variously stationed along the river, but again see my previous comment about straws! Reference-wise I think the inclusion of the more modern sources would be very useful, but if they're as similar to the older versions as you say then I can understand why you haven't invested in them. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:27, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

David Baird, 3rd Baronet
I notice I cannot move the title of this page. Per your explanation, it should be "Sir David Baird, 3rd Baronet". Could you help me move/rename this page appropriately? Ficaia (talk) 16:23, 23 February 2022 (UTC)


 * Yes, this one is a bit more awkward because there's an extant page that used to be a re-direct to Baird baronets. I think we'll need to request a move for it. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:27, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Would you mind doing that? Sorry for the bother. Ficaia (talk) 16:31, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Yep, have done so. Hopefully it'll be fixed soonish! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:35, 23 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Redirect done. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 02:14, 24 February 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that. Ficaia (talk) 02:43, 24 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Esther Acklom
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Esther Acklom 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 Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 16:41, 23 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Jason (1800)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Jason (1800) 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 No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 17:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Congrats, it's a...

 * Thanks very much! Still holding out hope that a portrait will turn up.. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:07, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Esther Acklom
The article Esther Acklom you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Esther Acklom for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Shearonink -- Shearonink (talk) 22:01, 25 February 2022 (UTC)

Naming conventions
Regarding our previous conversation, do you think this page - William Wolseley (brigadier-general) - should be renamed William Wolseley (English army officer)? Ficaia (talk) 20:44, 27 February 2022 (UTC)


 * I think that works better. Would it not be "English Army officer" rather than "English army officer"? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:53, 27 February 2022 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if there was an official "English Army". But the wiki page capitalises the term so I guess you're right. Ficaia (talk) 03:51, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Jason (1800)
The article HMS Jason (1800) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Jason (1800) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 09:41, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIV, February 2022
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) 22:23, 28 February 2022 (UTC)

Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style
Hey, I thought you might be interested in commenting on the proposed ban of feminine pronouns for ships. Regards, Ficaia (talk) 15:29, 12 March 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks for the heads up, although I've already given my opinion on the matter there. A divisive topic! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:59, 12 March 2022 (UTC)

British 1st Division GOC list
Howdy! Do your sources mention who may have taken command of the 1st Division following Waterloo? I have started on List of commanders of the British 1st Division and found that George Cooke lost an arm. I would imagine that he was not in command after that, but the usual sources do not seem to mention anything on the situation. In a similar vein, do they mention any acting commanders that Reid may have omitted? EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:22, 14 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I'll take a look. I'll note that my sources aren't exhaustive, but McGuigan and Burnham seem to have served me well.
 * Major-General Sir John Byng temporarily commanded 1st Division 18 June when Cooke lost his arm. Succeeded to command of 1st Corps later in the day when the Prince of Orange was injured. Commanded 1st Corps until July when Orange returned, and commanded 1st Division until 23 July when Kenneth Howard took over from him. Howard assumed command of 1st Corps on 22 August, leaving Byng in temporary command of 1st Division again. He left the command when he went on leave in October, and was not senior enough to return to the position. (McGuigan and Burnham, 2017, p. 77)
 * I knew there had to be some missing guys once I found out that guy had a missing arm! I think that rounds out the list for the Napoleonic War era, thank you. Kind of feel for Howard, his command of this division seems to be overshadowed by everyone else and was otherwise short-lived.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 19:09, 14 March 2022 (UTC)


 * But wait, there's more!
 * Major-General Henry Frederick Campbell was given temporary command of 1st Division on 25 July 1811 when Spencer went home. He was replaced by Graham on 9 August and returned to his brigade command. (McGuigan and Burnham, pp. 85–86) He was given command of the division again in May when Graham was given command of the Right Column of the army (three divisions). Graham returned home with his eye infection in early July, leaving Campbell in command of 1st Division until 11 October when he relinquished command and returned to England. (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 86)
 * Major-General Sir Peregrine Maitland temporarily commanded 1st Division when Byng took over 1st Corps on 18 June 1815 after Waterloo. He was too junior to continue in command of the division, and was replaced by Howard by 23 July. Byng replaced Howard on 22 August, but he went on leave, leaving Maitland in temporary command of 1st Division again between 2 October and 30 November.(McGuigan and Burnham, p. 205)
 * Major-General Miles Nightingall temporarily commanded 1st Division at the Battle of Fuentes de Oñoro between 3 and 5 May 1811 because Spencer was commanding a corps. Spencer had to command Wellington's army when the latter went to meet with Beresford after Albuera, likely meaning that Nightingall stayed in command of 1st Division through June. (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 209)
 * Brigadier-General Edward Stopford temporarily commanded 1st Division in June 1811 while Spencer was in temporary command of the army. (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 281)


 * I also note that there seem to be some other GOCs I've missed, such as:
 * Major-General Sir Henry de Hinuber (Eduard Christoph Heinrich von Hinuber) was given command of 4th Division on 11 April 1815 but was replaced with a more senior officer on 28 April (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 137)
 * Major-General William Henry Pringle was given temporary command of 2nd Division on 30 July 1813 when Stewart was injured. Stewart returned to his command on 4 August. (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 242)
 * Major-General George Townshend Walker may have temporarily commanded 2nd Division from 4 August 1813 to September, while Stewart recovered from his wound of 31 July. (McGuigan and Burnham, p. 304)

Pretty sure that's all McGuigan and Burnham have on the subject. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Sweet. I am going to try and update all the lists today, to take into account the above and the ones you left on my talkpage. There was one that left me a little confused. Thomas Brisbane for the 7th Division between 24 August–30 November 1815? Is the date a typo? To the best of my knowledge the 7th was disbanded in 1814 along with the rest of the peninsular army and not reraised for the Waterloo campaign.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 20:50, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Not a typo from my end at least. Direct quote from p. 64 as follows: "General Brisbane was placed on the staff of Wellington's army on 31 August 1815. His appointment was to date from 16 July. He was appointed to command the 14th Brigade 7th Division on 24 August, however, in the absence of a senior officer to command the division, he took temporary command of it the same day. General Brisbane was placed on the staff of the AOOF and given command of the 5th Brigade on 30 November 1815." Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:55, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you for double checking. I saw a reference state that Brisbane and the 14th had just returned from America. I wonder if the 7th was formed after the Battle of Waterloo from these returning troops? It would explain why they do not appear on the Waterloo campaign OOBs, and why the likes of Siborne don't mention Brisbane.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 22:24, 14 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Burnham and McGuigan, The British Army against Napoleon 2010 p. 54-55, explains that the army for Waterloo was created on 11 April 1815, but it continued to be reinforced with fresh troops until August, and was disbanded 30 November. Burnham and McGuigan list the following officers as commanding divisions in this army:
 * 1st Division: Major-General George Cooke, then Major-General Kenneth Howard
 * 2nd Division: Lieutenant-General Henry Clinton
 * 3rd Division: Major-General Charles Alten, then Major-General Thomas Bradford
 * 4th Division: Major-General Henry de Hinuber, then Major-General Charles Colville
 * 5th Division: Lieutenant-General Thomas Picton
 * 6th Division: Lieutenant-General Galbraith Lowry Cole
 * 7th Division: Major-General Thomas Brisbane
 * While it isn't referenced, Order of battle of the Waterloo campaign claims that " The British 7th Infantry Division under Major General Kenneth MacKenzie was not present at the battle as the brigade manned various garrisons around the area". This may be a typo because my sources say he in fact commanded the 7th Brigade, but probably worth further investigation? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:55, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Brisbane's reminiscences have the following to say about his services at this time :
 * "On landing at Portsmouth, I found an order for me to take the command of twelve regiments and proceed to Paris, and place myself under the command of the Duke of Wellington. Shortly after my arrival in Paris, his Grace directed me to have these regiments drawn up in order, that he might review them. They were accordingly formed into two lines of nearly 5000 men each."
 * That this was a division is confirmed on page 35:
 * "On my return from America, the late Major-General Sir Manby Power and the late Lord Kean informed me that they had written to the Duke of Wellington at Brussels, offering themselves for employment in the army which he was forming for Waterloo. His Grace replied that he should be happy to comply with their request, but he could hold out no promise to them until Sir Thomas Brisbane had received the Division which he preferred."
 * Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:31, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * Thank you. I hope you don't mind me crossing out the info above that I have actioned. It looks like the 1st and 2nd are complete for the period now. I am going to overhaul the 2nd list in line with a recent FLC review, and then I will move on to the others.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 17:24, 15 March 2022 (UTC)
 * No problem, happy to have been of assistance. Please feel free to ping me again if anything else comes up. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:45, 15 March 2022 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thank you! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Beaulieu
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Beaulieu 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 20:01, 14 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Beaulieu
The article HMS Beaulieu you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Beaulieu for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 14:01, 16 March 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVII, March 2022
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) 09:15, 29 March 2022 (UTC)

Stede Bonnet
I see from your edit summary there was some copyvio going on there - is it bad enough I need to apply revision deletion? Hog Farm Talk 18:24, 31 March 2022 (UTC)


 * I posted some examples on the talk page just above your comment, I think it was quite substantial. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:26, 31 March 2022 (UTC)
 * RD1 applied. Hog Farm Talk 18:30, 31 March 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hanover Expedition
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Hanover Expedition 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 22:41, 3 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hanover Expedition
The article Hanover Expedition 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:Hanover Expedition for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 18:21, 4 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Hanover Expedition
The article Hanover Expedition you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Hanover Expedition for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:41, 6 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Swallow (1745)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Swallow (1745) 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:21, 7 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Warren Peacocke
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Warren Peacocke 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 04:41, 9 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Swallow (1745)
The article HMS Swallow (1745) 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:HMS Swallow (1745) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 15:41, 10 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Swallow (1745)
The article HMS Swallow (1745) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Swallow (1745) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 12:21, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

I hope ...
I've not been too annoying with the reviews - I've enjoyed reviewing them, and will continue to review yours as I see them and have time - unless I've outstayed my welcome. Ealdgyth (talk) 12:32, 11 April 2022 (UTC)


 * Not at all! I'm very grateful for the reviews, and your copyediting especially has been very useful. Please continue to take up any of my articles that you wish to, and be as nit-picky as you want! The more comments, the more areas for improvement. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:35, 11 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Hussar (1799)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Hussar (1799) 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 05:41, 15 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Warren Peacocke
The article Warren Peacocke you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Warren Peacocke for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 00:21, 20 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Hussar (1799)
The article HMS Hussar (1799) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Hussar (1799) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 10:01, 27 April 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXVIII, April 2022
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) 22:24, 29 April 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 23:40, 3 May 2022 (UTC)

Welcome to the club
Thank you! Wouldn't have happened without all your helpful prodding. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 03:08, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton
The article Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton 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:Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:00, 7 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton
The article Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Charles FitzRoy, 1st Baron Southampton for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 13:41, 10 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roland Haig
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Roland Haig 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 14:21, 18 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Grinfield
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article William Grinfield 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 22:41, 21 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roland Haig
The article Roland Haig 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:Roland Haig for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 03:21, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Roland Haig
The article Roland Haig you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Roland Haig for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 19:41, 24 May 2022 (UTC)

Otto Bröhan
Do you have a physical copy of the Dalzel-Job book? Sturmvogel has added to the German trawler V 206 Otto Bröhan article but he only has an ebook. He states that pagination is difficult to determine, but the info added came from Chapter 11. We need the page number to fix a cite error. Mjroots (talk) 05:34, 27 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Afraid my copy is also an ebook! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:27, 27 May 2022 (UTC)

Fly
Hi Pickeresgill-Cunliffe, Great picture, but wrong vessel. The picture is of a cutter (one mast), whereas the Fly of the article was a ship-sloop. As you can see from the drawing, the ship-sloop had three masts. Cutters usually had a burthen of 100-50 tons, whereas the ship-sloop had a burthen of more than 300 tons. It's too bad, because it is a great picture. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 02:08, 28 May 2022 (UTC)


 * Argh, thanks for pointing that out, I've removed it. Possibly makes the image HMS Fly (1778)? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:31, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Could well be, if the dates match. Couldn't find anything in Winfield. Capture is described in Hepper. She does appear in the NMM database. One issue is that she sailed for the Windies in 1780, shortly after a commissioning in May. colledge says purchased in 1778. Unfortunately, no burthen info. Would that be consistent with the picture? Would be a very stubby article, with a great picture. With two-three book references we should be able to avoid the deletion vigilantes. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 19:34, 28 May 2022 (UTC)
 * The image's blurb is as follows: "A portrait of the 'Fly', 16 guns, in port-broadside view. She is shown heading south in the Downs (off the east coast of Kent) on the starboard tack, flying a pre-1801 Union Jack on the end of her bowsprit and the red ensign. She also appears in stern view on the left heading towards an anchored two-decker flying the flag of a vice-admiral of the blue at the fore, a jack and a blue ensign. Another ship under reduced sail is on the far left, with various small craft also in view. Under the 'Fly's' bowsprit can be seen the cliffs of the South Foreland. To the right of her stern is a Deal lugger and, on the shore, Walmer Castle. The painting is signed 'F. Holman', lower left. The received title of the picture is 'The Privateer 'Fly'' but it is not clear why this may be the case, apart from the fact that in the stern view she appears very heavily manned (as was often so with privateers, private warships licensed to attack state enemies for profit). Both the flags and armament are consistent with this being a portrait of the Royal Naval cutter 'Fly' of 1779."
 * The Fly SIA page suggests Demerliac might have some information on her capture too. Ships of the Old Navy (not the best source, but..) records her as a 14-gun cutter. mentions her participating in operations under Rodney at Tobago. That's all I can offer, I'm afraid. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 10:11, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe: I will go ahead and write up a short article. I'll let you know when it is up so that you may add the picture. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 15:23, 30 May 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe: I have put up HMS Fly (1778). If you could add in the picture, and any other stuff that you can, that would be great. On an unrelated matter, I see that you moved HMS Didon. The WP policy of removing what appears to be unnecessary additional info from article titles is one that I disagree with. The year, while not necessary for disambiguation, may still provide possible readers with useful info, if for no other reason than that it situates her in time. I am always conscious that I don't know what people are looking for when they search, and that being helpful is not a bad idea. WP disagrees, but now semi-agrees with the introduction of short descriptions. Most short descriptions, especially the bot installed ones, are pretty crappy in that they add little info to the article title, but that is changing. Anyway, I look forward to seeing what you can add to Fly. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:08, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks, I've added the image. Will see if I can find any other details too. Re Didon in my opinion removing unnecessary disambiguation from titles can be useful, for ships at least. If I read a title and see the date after the name I (naturally?) assume that that means there are other ships of the same name. I think improving short descriptions is a better way of handling the problem, but that doesn't mean I'll be going on a crusade to move all the ship articles I think are wrongly disambiguated. I've moved a couple as I've come across them, but we certainly have bigger issues to deal with! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 09:20, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Moving back to Fly, you might want to see if any of your sources have further information on Ponsonby. He died in 1815, by which time he was a post-captain. It did, however, take him almost thirty years to make the jump from commander! Also, what's your source for Ponsonby commissioning Fly in 1780? You have him as a commander then, but Syrett and DiNardo record his promotion to that rank only on 15 January 1781. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 09:26, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, thanks for the picture and the additional info. I added the NMM database citation for Fly's commissioning. I have nothing on Ponsonby as he had died before Marshall wrote his volume. Munster Lass is another niggling mystery. There is nothing on her in Colledge, Winfield, or the NMM database. All I can find in Lloyd's Review is a mention in 1779 of a vessel of 60 tons (bm), built in America in 1760, and trading between Cork and Bordeaux. Perhaps she came out to the Caribbean where the Navy purchased or hired her. If you could keep her in the back of your mind that would be great. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 11:45, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Munster Lass looks like a good puzzle. Nothing apart from Rodney's Tobago report in the London Gazette. The Scot's Magazine does record a Munster Lass taken sailing from Pensacola to Jamaica, retaken and sent into Jamaica in December 1780. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:43, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Best I could do for now: Munster Lass. Additions and corrections more than welcome. Acad Ronin (talk) 17:12, 2 June 2022 (UTC)
 * There seems to be some confusion here. The "14 gun" reference is to the ship sloop of 1776 (a standard unit of the Swan class), although please note she had an additional pair of 6pdrs added in 1780. The Fly captured in 1781 had only been taken into service in 1780, not 1778, and was commissioned under Lieut Milham Ponsonby. Punsonby was promoted to Commander on 15 January 1781, while still commanding the cutter in the Caribbean. She carried 8 guns. As for the Munster Lass, she appears on no list of RN vessels, and I suggest was only hired, not purchased for the Navy. Rif. Rif Winfield (talk) 12:33, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Pinging as probably being able to answer better than I. Does this mean we have Fly (1776), Fly (1780), and whatever this is? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:01, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * To reiterate, there were two vessels acquired and given the name of Fly during the War of American Independence. The 14-gun ship sloop of 1776 served from late 1776 (with a couple of gaps in service when she was held in Ordinary) until lost in January 1802. The 8-gun cutter was purchased in 1780 but did not last long; she was captured by the the French Glorieux on 4 June 1781 off Tobago. The Francis Holman portrait would appear to be the latter vessel. I should mention that there had been earlier vessels bearing the name Fly, including a 4-gun cutter built commercially about 1759 and acquired (i.e. purchased) by the Navy in January 1763; she was sold off in 1771, but she was much smaller and would not appear to be the vessel in the Holman painting. Rif Winfield (talk) 12:49, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIII, May 2022
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) 15:55, 29 May 2022 (UTC)

Tuscarora
Thanks for reverting the edit on that one - between my wikibreak and a work trip I've been largely absent from here for about half of the month and that apparently slipped past my attention. I've flagged the image on Commons as a copyvio and have also marked two more by the same uploader for deletion. That sock farm's been quite prolific with low-quality additions of both articles and sketchy images. Hog Farm Talk 22:55, 30 May 2022 (UTC)


 * No problem at all, although in the six minutes between upload and reversion I didn't give you much time to beat me to it..! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 23:00, 30 May 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Perseverance-class frigate
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Perseverance-class frigate 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 12:02, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744) 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 Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 00:22, 2 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Perseverance-class frigate
The article Perseverance-class frigate 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:Perseverance-class frigate for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 19:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Perseverance-class frigate
The article Perseverance-class frigate you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Perseverance-class frigate for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 21:22, 4 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744)
The article Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744) 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:Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 18:02, 5 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744)
The article Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Charles Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1744) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Ealdgyth -- Ealdgyth (talk) 16:42, 7 June 2022 (UTC)

Congratulations - May 2022 MilHist Article Writing Contest
Think you've stolen Hog Farm's thunder here! I certainly didn't get 42 points this month... Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 11:37, 8 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Strewth, that's embarrassing! I was looking at the wrong table! Have struck through, but please delete entirely if you prefer. Zawed (talk) 23:39, 8 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of William Grinfield
The article William Grinfield you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:William Grinfield for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 10:21, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks - and a request
Thanks for adding in the "Yard" after Blackwall, to stop it being an ambiguation! I'm pleased to see your draft article on Rear-Adm Sir Thomas Hardy, but please can you add a "not to be confused with" at the start of your article to avoid confusion with the later - and far better known Thomas Masterman Hardy. Incidentally, Admiralty records show that Rear-Adm Hardy was never promoted beyond Rear-Admiral of the Blue (you can check this in the Navy Records Society publication of "The Commissioned Sea Officers of the Royal Navy 1660-1815" (1994), so this is an item which John Knox Laughton was mistaken about. Regards, Rif Rif Winfield (talk) 11:45, 13 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks, and I will be doing so. You wouldn't imagine the confusion some historians have gotten into with the two Thomas Hardys and two Charles Hardys! I agree that he wasn't promoted past RAB, it's interesting that while other sources record him as being dismissed from the navy, Commissioned Sea Officers doesn't. Laughton, by the way, is aware that there was no official record of a further promotion: "Some of these were afterwards reinstated, as, it is said, was Hardy, and promoted to be vice-admiral of the red. If so, it was on a reserved list, for his name does not appear in a list of flag-officers in 1727". Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 12:19, 13 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Indeed, we are in agreement. Rif Winfield (talk) 18:40, 13 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732) 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 Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:02, 16 June 2022 (UTC)

Freddie de Guingand
I have Freddie de Guingand up for A-class review, and I could use a reviewer or two. I realise that it is outside your usual time period, but I wonder if you might consider contributing a review at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Freddie de Guingand. Anyway, great work. Hawkeye7  (discuss)  23:29, 17 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Happy to have a look soonish. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 11:15, 18 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of York Light Infantry Volunteers
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article York Light Infantry Volunteers 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 Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 04:21, 19 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of York Light Infantry Volunteers
The article York Light Infantry Volunteers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:York Light Infantry Volunteers for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Djmaschek -- Djmaschek (talk) 21:01, 20 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer) 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 Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:01, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer)
The article Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer) 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:Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 22:41, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer)
The article Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Henry Smith (Royal Navy officer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:41, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Request
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, I was wondering if you'd be kind enough to review a Did You Know nomination for me. The article is quite short and the subject is one that will be of interest to you I hope. I nominated on 4 June but it has yet to get any attention. The review template is here should you wish to oblige. I am happy to return the favour another time. I understand if you're busy with other things so absolutely no pressure. Thanks either way.--Ykraps (talk) 07:09, 26 June 2022 (UTC)


 * I've left a comment on the review page. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:16, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I have replied there. Best --Ykraps (talk) 20:22, 27 June 2022 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing that. I owe you one. --Ykraps (talk) 05:43, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732)
The article Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732) 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:Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:41, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732)
The article Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Thomas Hardy (Royal Navy officer, died 1732) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 13:02, 29 June 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIV, June 2022
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) 11:43, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gordon Chesney Wilson
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Gordon Chesney Wilson 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 Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:03, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gordon Chesney Wilson
The article Gordon Chesney Wilson 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:Gordon Chesney Wilson for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:42, 24 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Gordon Chesney Wilson
The article Gordon Chesney Wilson you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Gordon Chesney Wilson for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:02, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVI, July 2022
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) 20:28, 26 July 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Resistance (1801)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Resistance (1801) 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 Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 03:22, 10 August 2022 (UTC)

Any interest?
Self-nominations for WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2022 start on September 1. We could always use fresh blood. Hog Farm Talk 23:12, 12 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Happy to put my name forward if it looks like there won't be enough otherwise. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 17:34, 16 August 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Resistance (1801)
The article HMS Resistance (1801) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Resistance (1801) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 04:21, 13 August 2022 (UTC)

HMS Inspector
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, I have just put up HMS Inspector (1782). She was involved in the mutiny at the Nore in 1797. I have a citation in the article to an article about her role. If interested, let me know and I can email it to you. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 03:14, 27 August 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi sounds interesting, I'd love to see it. Good to see another of Robert Howe Bromley's commands get an article too! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:49, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Turns out I apparently cannot attach a pdf when using the WP email utility; I can only send a verbal message. Can you send me your actual email address and then I can send you a message with the attachment. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 16:00, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * I use calbre88@gmail.com for Wikipedia stuff. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:04, 27 August 2022 (UTC)
 * Many thanks, have received the pdf. Especially enamoured by the appendix; it's surprisingly difficult to find lists of ships present at the mutiny! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:19, 28 August 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVII, August 2022
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) 08:59, 29 August 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election nominations opening soon
Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are opening in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 1 September). A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:52, 31 August 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Polycarpus Taylor
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Polycarpus Taylor 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 03:21, 10 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting opening soon!
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election opens in a few hours (00:01 UTC on 15 September) and will last through 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 22:27, 14 September 2022 (UTC)

Correction to previous election announcement
Just a quick correction to the prior message about the 2022 MILHIST coordinator election! I didn't proofread the message well enough and left out a link to the election page itself in this message. The voting will occur here; sorry about the need for a second message and the inadvertent omission from the prior one. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:41, 15 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexander Wilson (Royal Navy officer)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alexander Wilson (Royal Navy officer) 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 Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 17:01, 18 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Polycarpus Taylor
The article Polycarpus Taylor you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Polycarpus Taylor for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:41, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alexander Wilson (Royal Navy officer)
The article Alexander Wilson (Royal Navy officer) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alexander Wilson (Royal Navy officer) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Simongraham -- Simongraham (talk) 10:21, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Wikiproject Military history coordinator election voting closing soon
Voting for the upcoming project coordinator election closes soon, at 23:59 on 28 September. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next coordination year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. Voting is conducted using simple approval voting and questions for the candidates are welcome. The voting itself is occurring here If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the current coord team. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 20:14, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, September 2022
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) 21:31, 26 September 2022 (UTC)

6th Div
Thank you for the recent edit. It is strange that Cole was given leave, but it does make sense of Siborne. Cole is barely mentioned (and it would seem nowhere in relation to the Waterloo fighting) whereas there is a lot mentioned of Lambert and his brigade. EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 13:56, 1 October 2022 (UTC)

HMS Aigle (1801)
I see you've been busy reviewing articles for the Military History Project. Do you fancy weighing in at Featured article candidates/HMS Aigle (1801)/archive1? No pressure if you're too busy with your new appointment (for which I congratulate you). Also, have you considered nominating HMS Resistance (1801) for FA? Best regards --Ykraps (talk) 06:32, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Happy to have a look at Aigle; I think my input on the article has been minor enough to not be an issue. Will finish the GA review I'm doing first, but certainly pencil me in there. Resistance is a very short article, and I hadn't intended to take it any further. I suppose despite its brevity the article is pretty complete; would welcome any suggestions you might have. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 10:37, 5 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Thanks, I look forward to reading your comments. The reason I ask about Resistance is that I was contemplating having a go at a Featured Topic. I have never done one before and thought that Aigle-class frigates could be a good way to learn the ropes before trying a bigger challenge. Resistance is a very short article but I think getting it to FA is possible. Did you check the London Gazette? --Ykraps (talk) 20:59, 5 October 2022 (UTC)
 * I believe I did look through the LG, but will have a double check of the older sources in case anything else pops up. I note that while any Featured Topic would be at least a little way off completion, an initial Good Topic wouldn't require too much. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:27, 6 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Yeah, a Good Topic might be a way of cutting my teeth. I have a couple of bits I want to finish off first but after, I hope to start on the required third article (Aigle-class frigate). --Ykraps (talk) 05:53, 7 October 2022 (UTC)
 * (Haven't forgotten about this, will get to it.) Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 19:14, 9 October 2022 (UTC)
 * Apologies that the review ended up being so long winded. Hope it was useful. It's a very good article! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:16, 24 October 2022 (UTC)
 * No need to apologise. Thanks for your thorough review. I am hoping to start Aigle-class frigate soon and will welcome your input there too. Best --Ykraps (talk) 17:59, 24 October 2022 (UTC)

Hms Trincomalee
I hope you will at least watch the Victoria episode "A Soldier's Daughter", especially the scene where she is speaking to a crowd from "HMS Trafalgar:" (really Trincomalee)

Please see this site https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/masterpiece/specialfeatures/victoria-season-2-locations/

Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 20:35, 9 October 2022 (UTC)


 * I'll check it out, thanks! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 10:57, 10 October 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for indicating a willingness to check out the relevant scene in the show as well as the link. I am a little disappointed that you have not yet restored my edit. Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 14:29, 15 October 2022 (UTC)


 * To be included in an article on Wikipedia, the information relating to the subject should be notable. Trincomalee being a filming location for one episode of a television show might be considered by some to be trivial, and not suitable for inclusion in the article. Furthermore, the link you provide is from the company who broadcast the show rather than from any independent source discussing Trincomalee's part in any detail. Indeed, the source does not actually state that Trincomalee was even used in filming, only that she is based at the National Museum of the Royal Navy. I hope you understand why that's not appropriate for inclusion. Thanks, Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 16:49, 15 October 2022 (UTC)

I believe that if you see the scenes, you will agree that it is Trincomalee, although edited to look like a two decker. There is also a better view of it without the extra deck in the scene where people are disembarking. The source does state that Hartlepool is the real location, in addition to mentioning that the ship is located there. The scene in France that is also really in Hartlepool shows the Wingfield Castle (posing as the steamer that Victoria crossed the channel on) with the masts of Trincomalee in the background. I don't think you have looked at the scenes, but very much hope that you will. I suspect you will then fall back on your argument that it is too trivial to be mentioned.

Tupelo the typo fixer (talk) 15:34, 18 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Cato (1782)
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Cato (1782) 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 Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:01, 14 October 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCVIII, October 2022
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) 15:38, 16 October 2022 (UTC)

HMS Meleager (1785)‎
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, getting picky are we? :-) Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:51, 21 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Would have been more exciting if a 30-year-old full admiral with a knighthood had arbitrarily taken over command of a frigate! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 13:53, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Cato (1782)
The article HMS Cato (1782) 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:HMS Cato (1782) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:41, 22 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Cato (1782)
The article HMS Cato (1782) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:HMS Cato (1782) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:41, 23 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Keith Stewart
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Keith Stewart 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 Guerillero -- Guerillero (talk) 21:40, 29 October 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Keith Stewart
The article Keith Stewart you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Keith Stewart for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Guerillero -- Guerillero (talk) 23:21, 30 October 2022 (UTC)

FA Nomination of Prince Alfred of Great Britain
Hi, @Pickersgill-Cunliffe. I have left you a message on Featured article candidates/Prince Alfred of Great Britain/archive1. If you don't mind, please take a look when you have time. Thank you, Unlimitedlead (talk) 12:25, 31 October 2022 (UTC)


 * Hi, I'm currently in the very final stages of moving house and so am not quite as available as I should be. Apologies for missing your earlier ping, I'll get back to the review ASAP. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 11:50, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
 * @Pickersgill-Cunliffe I am so sorry for rushing! Please feel free to take as long as you need during this period of transition. Thanks, Unlimitedlead (talk) 18:27, 1 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Narcissus-class frigate
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Narcissus-class frigate 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 Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 17:21, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CXCIX, November 2022
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) 10:32, 9 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Narcissus-class frigate
The article Narcissus-class frigate 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:Narcissus-class frigate for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 10:01, 10 November 2022 (UTC)

Postwar Stalin bluewater operations
I've just stumbled across this book which might be useful if you want to do anymore post-war Soviet ships: Watson, Bruce. Red Navy At Sea: Soviet Naval Operations On The High Seas, 1956-1980. And should be consulted before sending your latest to FAC. Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:31, 20 November 2022 (UTC)


 * Er...are you perhaps looking for ?! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 15:02, 20 November 2022 (UTC)
 * Yes, of course. Thanks for the link. --Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 16:06, 20 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Narcissus-class frigate
The article Narcissus-class frigate you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Narcissus-class frigate for comments about the article, and Talk:Narcissus-class frigate/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 22:04, 23 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Suckling
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Maurice Suckling 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:04, 24 November 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Maurice Suckling
The article Maurice Suckling you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Maurice Suckling for comments about the article, and Talk:Maurice Suckling/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:04, 28 November 2022 (UTC)

ArbCom 2022 Elections voter message
 Hello! Voting in the 2022 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once.

The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail.

If you wish to participate in the 2022 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:41, 29 November 2022 (UTC)

B2
Hi Pickersgill,

I see you recently downgraded the ratings of my Biron and Gordes articles due to failure to meet b2 criteria. How can I satisfy that aspect of the rating in your mind?

Sovietblobfish (talk) 07:17, 1 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Coverage was the sticking point for me. A lot of your sections cover large periods of time and/or events, such as Gordes' "Reign of François I" but then only have a sentence or two of information. Reading them left me with the idea that context was missing, as well as explanations for many of the events. E.g. again with Gordes, you name people but never explain who they are and identify events he was involved in but never tell us the details about them. An example might be "After participating in the German campaign of late 1552, he returned to his governorship of Mondovì and in 1554 captured some nearby settlements alongside Bonnivet.". That's a lot of events squidged into one sentence! I'm left wondering what exactly he was doing in the campaign, what the campaign even was, who Bonnivet was and why he was working with Gordes, and what the settlements he captured were. It doesn't seem like what you're writing is wrong by any means, but to a non-expert reader like me it all seems quite surface level. Hope this rambling explanation has been useful! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 18:40, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * That's fair, the trouble is for a lot of these figures I write about the answer is, I don't have the details. I have about 25-30 books in my library for my FWOR biography articles, often they'll tell me they were governor of so and so town and such things, but I would have to go into the local towns physical archives to find out information beyond that, and that would be primary research, which is not our purpose on wikipedia. Sometimes I do find the details in 19th century biographies, but often the information is of such bad quality I can't use it.
 * I probably could elaborate more when articles intersect each other, as with Bonnivet, I have previously assumed that if a user wanted to learn more about that figure they'd click through the link and read that article so that they have context. Sovietblobfish (talk) 20:21, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I find a good rule when including a person in an article for the first time is to at minimum say what their role was/who they were. E.g. "the commander of XXX army, General XXX" or "military historian XXX has said that...". The aim is to keep the article on topic, but not to force them to click away to figure out why, for example, someone else is being mentioned. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 20:29, 1 December 2022 (UTC)
 * I think that's a wise idea, I will make note of it for future articles. Sovietblobfish (talk) 20:32, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wolfe-class ship of the line
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wolfe-class ship of the line 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 23:04, 1 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wolfe-class ship of the line
The article Wolfe-class ship of the line 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:Wolfe-class ship of the line and Talk:Wolfe-class ship of the line/GA1 for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 04:43, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wolfe-class ship of the line
The article Wolfe-class ship of the line you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wolfe-class ship of the line for comments about the article, and Talk:Wolfe-class ship of the line/GA1 for the nomination. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by ChristieBot, on behalf of Hog Farm -- Hog Farm (talk) 20:24, 2 December 2022 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CC, December 2022
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) 12:56, 9 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Maurice Suckling
&mdash; Amakuru (talk) 00:03, 12 December 2022 (UTC)

USS Viper (1806)
Hi Pickersgill-Cunliffe, not disputing, just haven't the faintest idea of what a "split" is. It would be easy to make an article about Asp II, though most of it would duplicate what is in Viper. Cheers, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:39, 15 December 2022 (UTC)


 * My understanding is that the banner was there (albeit untouched for three years) to question whether the section on Asp should be moved (or split) out of the Mohawk/Viper article and into an article on Asp. Imo that doesn't make much sense for a split request; you should be asking for a split if for example a ship was used by two nations and her service history was so extensive for both that having one article would be too big/confusing, and thus they're split into two. This was a request to split out some context for a battle Mohawk was in to a page about the ship she was fighting, which should be a simple copy+paste with attribution rather than any chopping up of the extant article! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 01:47, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Got it. Actually, the DANFS for Asp II is mostly (80%+) the info from Viper. One wouldn't even have to do a cut and paste plus attribution. Just make a new article with the DANFS source. At some point I may do that, just to get rid of a red link on the USS Asp page. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 01:59, 15 December 2022 (UTC)
 * FYI: I have just put up USS Asp (1813). I was able to add some non-DANFS info also. Regards, Acad Ronin (talk) 23:29, 15 December 2022 (UTC)

ITN recognition for HTMS Sukhothai
Good work Guess we both had the same thought when we saw the news article. Glad you've got a copy of Janes to hand! - Dumelow (talk) 21:01, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Happy to help. I kept having to rewrite my piece to avoid interrupting your edits! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:30, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * The perils of collaboration! Though I find the current edit conflict resolver thing is quite handy - Dumelow (talk) 21:39, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Speaking of collaboration, and as a proud stalker of your userpage, if you'd like any assistance with that list of RN flag officers do say..! Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 21:48, 19 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Was just about to post here to let you know! Feel free to dive in.  I think there's few enough that they can stay in two separate lists for pre and post armistice, which will require a rank column adding - Dumelow (talk) 21:51, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Right. My one immediate question is what's a flag officer? I wasn't going to include commodores but see that you have in the initial CWGC list. Do we have any definitive source to decide for us? Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 22:37, 19 December 2022 (UTC)
 * Good find on the image. Good point on the "flag officers" thing.  Looks like the definition caries depending on where and the RN do not consider commodores as flag officers (or "officers of flag rank", in another complication).  I've refactored as a list of admirals only, there was only one commodore anyway and I may add him as a footnote somewhere - Dumelow (talk) 06:55, 20 December 2022 (UTC)

DYK for Wolfe-class ship of the line
-- RoySmith (talk) 00:02, 26 December 2022 (UTC)


 * "In the 1830s the dockyard began to be dispersed with."
 * Did you really want "dispensed with", a much more common and apt phrasing? Shenme (talk) 01:13, 26 December 2022 (UTC)
 * The dockyard continued to exist until the 1850s, so I think I prefer the source's wording of "dispersed", which imo doesn't suggest a complete removal/shutting down of the yard as "dispensed" does. Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:00, 26 December 2022 (UTC)

Merry Christmas
 Nosebagbear (talk) is wishing you a Merry Christmas! This greeting (and season) promotes WikiLove and hopefully this note has made your day a little better. Spread the WikiLove by wishing another user a Merry Christmas, whether it be someone you have had disagreements with in the past, a good friend, or just some random person. Happy New Year!

Spread the cheer by adding {{subst:Xmas2}} to their talk page with a friendly message.

French ship Brillant (1814)
I intend to move this article to HMS Genoa per COMMONNAME. Luckily no datedab is required as it is the only ship by that name and prefix. However, the launch date is uncertain, Winfield gives 18 April 1815 ie exactly 1 year after she was captured on slip, Benyon also used as a cite has her leaving Genoa for the UK on 1 August 1814, Roche gives a date of 1814 for launching. Do you have access to Clowes? Currently I am minded to use the Winfield date although I suspect it is wrong as best RS but if you have any other source happy to with that Lyndaship (talk) 11:17, 28 December 2022 (UTC)


 * Clowes only provides "At Genoa there was found a 74, the Brillant, ready for launching. She was ultimately launched, and added to the Navy as Genoa." Pickersgill-Cunliffe (talk) 14:30, 28 December 2022 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of HMS Hebrus
Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article HMS Hebrus 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 ChristieBot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:22, 29 December 2022 (UTC)