User talk:Prioryman/Archive 4

DYK for Eston railway station
The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 1 April 2012 (UTC)


 * This was a good DYK. I like it :)  Mohamed CJ  (talk)  12:04, 1 April 2012 (UTC)

HighBeam
Hi, the project page says that applications will officially begin being accepted between April 2 and April 9th, with accounts distributed by April 16th. That's the timeline, and everything is going as planned. Glad you signed up! Ocaasit &#124; c 17:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, thanks for the update! I think it would be helpful if you could post that clarification on Wikipedia talk:Highbeam as well, to keep people informed. Prioryman (talk) 17:58, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Updated to make that information more prominent. Thanks for the tip.  Ocaasit &#124; c 22:07, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 5
Hi. When you recently edited Titanic Memorial, Belfast, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Thomas Andrews (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:57, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Titanic film list (table)
Please check out suggestions here -- In case you haven't noticed, the 100th anniversary of the Titanic event is comming soon, and there will certainly be increased traffic on the subject.

~Regards, Eric F 184.76.225.106 (talk) 14:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

P.s.: See also. ~E 184.76.225.106 (talk) 16:47, 5 April 2012 (UTC)

Olympic and LV-117
Hello. I took out the reference to Olympic's weight, as the figure given would have been her maximum displacement. I saw somewhere that the liner burned 600+ tons of fuel a day, and stores and water would have been depleted. In addition, the ship likely was nowhere near capacity in passengers and baggage. Some work has been done on Titanic's displacement when sunk; I believe it was about 48,000t, or 5,000t less than maximum. Olympic had nearly completed her crossing when she demolished the lightship. Does Chirnside give displacement figures for when the collision occurred? Regards, Kablammo (talk) 19:50, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, he says 52,000t! I take your point but I think there's a better way of resolving it than taking the weight out altogether, since it's a key point - the damage was done through sheer mass rather than speed. I'll have a go at rewording it. Prioryman (talk) 20:32, 5 April 2012 (UTC)
 * This page on Chirnside's website gives light displacement at 40,850t, and summer full load (which would be the highest, as more freeboard and therefore less dp would have been required in the winter on the North Atlantic) at 52,310. Fuel oil consumption (Olympic was converted to oil in the 1920s) was 600t/day.  Light dp would not have included passengers, baggage, consumable, and other items, but I'm not sure how Chirnside is using the term.  In any event Olympic would have displaced considerably more than 41,000t and considerably less than 52,000t when the collision took place. Incidentally, the terms gross tonnage and gross register tonnage are measures of volume, not of weight, and should never be used to refer to weight in marine usage.  Kablammo (talk) 14:28, 6 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Further: In this article Mark Chirnside states:"if Olympic was loaded to a light draught of 27 feet 10½ inches, she would displace 40,850 tons. In this condition, the light draught, the ship’s boilers would be full, but there would be no fuel, fresh water or stores onboard the ship"Kablammo (talk) 16:33, 6 April 2012 (UTC)

Titanic film list
I've been doing stuff with the list, you might want to check on it to see if the changes meet with your approval. I just thought I'd help get that page "ship-shape"[pun intended] before the April 15 launch.

DYK nomination of Titanic Belfast
Hello! Your submission of Titanic Belfast at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!  Harrias  talk 14:10, 7 April 2012 (UTC)

"S.S."
Please see my entry on the RMS Titanic lifeboat talk page, re: "S.S. Titanic" designation.


 * Thanks for clarifying the caption. ~E 184.76.225.106 (talk) 02:52, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

Template:Did you know nominations/RMS Titanic in popular culture
Hi, I've reviewed the above nomination and there are several issues. Thank you Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:02, 8 April 2012 (UTC)

RMS Titanic broken citations
You've broken a lot of citations with your rewrite of the "Culture" section. Can you please clean that up? See the end of the "References" section. —Diiscool (talk) 17:52, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I know, I'm working through it at the moment... Prioryman (talk) 18:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Sinking of the RMS Titanic
This is a note to let the main editors of Sinking of the RMS Titanic know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on April 15, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Today's featured article/April 15, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director or his delegate, or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:



The sinking of the RMS Titanic on 15 April 1912, with the loss of over 1,500 lives, was one of the deadliest peacetime maritime disasters in history. Four days into her maiden voyage from Southampton to New York, Titanic – at the time the world's largest ship – struck an iceberg in the North Atlantic off Newfoundland. Five of her watertight compartments were holed, causing the ship to flood deck by deck. She carried too few lifeboats for her 2,223 passengers and crew, and many seats were left empty due to a poorly managed evacuation. Titanic's officers loaded the lifeboats "women and children first", leaving most of the men aboard the ship. Two hours and forty minutes after the collision, Titanic sank with over a thousand people still aboard. Almost all those who jumped or fell into the freezing water soon died of hypothermia or drowned. The RMS Carpathia rescued the survivors from the lifeboats a few hours later. Public outrage at the loss of life led to tougher maritime safety regulations. Titanic's wreck was not found until 1985. The disaster has inspired a wealth of popular culture including many films, most notably James Cameron's Titanic in 1997. (more...) UcuchaBot (talk) 23:02, 10 April 2012 (UTC)

Titanic porting around
For clarity, the caption for image: Titanic porting around (on Sinking of the RMS Titanic page) should include: Red = path of stern, Blue = path of bow. -- Note: I added that to image description.

Disambiguation link notification for April 12
Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ* Join us at the DPL WikiProject.


 * Memorials and monuments to the RMS Titanic victims (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added links pointing to Halifax, Nova Scotia and Triton


 * RMS Titanic (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
 * added a link pointing to Halifax, Nova Scotia

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 11:09, 12 April 2012 (UTC)

"Taste"
I believe your statement that the lounge is a dining room, but the article doesn't mention that fact. A DYK hook needs to be clearly supported by the article. If you want to use the word "taste" in the DYK hook, the article should tell about food. --Orlady (talk) 13:22, 13 April 2012 (UTC)

Your HighBeam account is ready!
Good news! You now have access to 80 million articles in 6500 publications through HighBeam Research. Here's what you need to know: Thanks for helping make Wikipedia better. Enjoy your research! Cheers, Ocaasit &#124; c 20:57, 13 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Your account activation code has been emailed to your Wikipedia email address.
 * Only 407 of 444 codes were successfully delivered; most failed because email was simply not set up (You can set it in Special:Preferences).
 * If you did not receive a code but were on the approved list, add your name to this section and we'll try again.
 * The 1-year, free period begins when you enter the code.
 * To activate your account: 1) Go to http://www.highbeam.com/prof1; 2) You’ll see the first page of a two-page registration. 3) Put in an email address and set up a password. (Use a different email address if you signed up for a free trial previously); 4) Click “Continue” to reach the second page of registration; 5) Input your basic information; 6) Input the activation code; 7) Click “Finish”. Note that the activation codes are one-time use only and are case-sensitive.
 * If you need assistance, email "help at highbeam dot com", and include "HighBeam/Wikipedia" in the subject line. Or go to WP:HighBeam/Support, or ask User:Ocaasi.  Please, per HighBeam's request, do not call the toll-free number for assistance with registration.
 * A quick reminder about using the account: 1) try it out; 2) provide original citation information, in addition to linking to a HighBeam article; 3) avoid bare links to non-free HighBeam pages; 4) note "(subscription required)" in the citation, where appropriate
 * HighBeam would love to hear feedback at WP:HighBeam/Experiences
 * Show off your HighBeam access by placing on your userpage
 * When the 1-year period is up, check applications page to see if renewal is possible. We hope it will be.

DYK for United States lightship LV-117
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:03, 14 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for A Night to Remember (book)
Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Outstanding effort
Thank you for your efforts on the Sinking of the RMS Titanic article; it's a pleasure to read. It's not often we get such a massive article featured, and it's just unspeakably wonderful when we do. Thank you.  ceran  thor 04:26, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thank you too! It was hard work, but always gratifying to see it being appreciated. :-) Prioryman (talk) 11:11, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Titanic Memorial, Belfast
Orlady (talk) 08:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Animals aboard the RMS Titanic
Orlady (talk) 08:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for RMS Titanic in popular culture
Orlady (talk) 08:04, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

Making up my misconceptions
My apologies for changing the class from B to List for Lifeboats of the RMS Titanic. I know you are a hardworker on that; sometimes, I see things differently, such as List of Sailor Moon characters. To make up my misconceptions, I am proposing a merger of the below orchestra members into Orchestra of the RMS Titanic:


 * Theodore Ronald Brailey,
 * Roger Marie Bricoux,
 * Wallace Hartley,
 * John Law Hume,
 * Georges Alexandre Krins
 * People who has no articles on their own (see Crew of the RMS Titanic: Mr. John Frederick Preston Clarke; Mr. Percy Cornelius Taylor; Mr. John Wesley Woodward

What do you say? --George Ho (talk) 11:55, 15 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Good idea in principle, but not by that article name - Titanic didn't have an orchestra or a band, she had two separate ensembles of musicians who only played together for the first and last time during the sinking. If you call it Musicians of the RMS Titanic that should be fine. Prioryman (talk) 15:00, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * So this idea is uncontroversial, correct? If so, can I boldly do the merging now? I can simply merge without much substantial editing, so you can do the rest. How's that? --George Ho (talk) 20:46, 15 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Can I first either merge them or discuss the merge proposal? --George Ho (talk) 08:33, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I've had a few more thoughts about this. I think, to be honest, that the articles should probably be left unmerged, as there is quite a lot of material in them, particularly Wallace Hartley. However, I think there is a degree of overlap between the articles, and there needs to be an overview article (Musicians of the RMS Titanic). Sorting it all out is likely to be quite a complex task... Prioryman (talk) 20:19, 18 April 2012 (UTC)

Also, I have created a proposal in WP:Proposed mergers. --George Ho (talk) 18:37, 19 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Saved from the Titanic
The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Titanic Belfast
The DYK project (nominate) 16:06, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for White Swan Hotel
The DYK project (nominate) 16:07, 15 April 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Masabumi Hosono
The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 16 April 2012 (UTC)

Help with Titanic articles
I noticed the flurry of Titanic-related articles at DYK for this weekend. I'd intended to finish off two I was working on, but missed the boat, so to speak... (yeah, terrible pun). I'd still like to nominate them for DYK, but as you (and others) have done such huge amounts of work on the Titanic articles recently, I thought I'd drop off links to the two new articles here first, in the hope that you or others could help polish them up a bit, add stuff I've missed or don't have sources for, that sort of thing (and add in links from the existing Titanic articles, something I never remember to do). The articles are on the two inquiries that took place following the disaster: United States Senate inquiry into the sinking of the RMS Titanic and British Wreck Commissioner's inquiry into the sinking of the RMS Titanic. Possibly some additional redirects are needed as well. Oh, and the trick to make part of the title italics (as in the Sinking of the RMS Titanic article). Talking of which, hope the day on the main page with that article went OK. Carcharoth (talk) 00:20, 16 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for doing those articles! I'd hoped to be able to tackle those topics myself before the centenary weekend but ran out of time. I'll take a look at them. Prioryman (talk) 20:27, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks. I did see the list of articles in your userspace that you were working on, but wasn't sure if you or anyone else was thinking of doing articles on the inquiries - I'd actually noticed the possibility some months ago, but left it rather late to do anything about it - next time (for other anniversary topics) getting a list together like you did and getting people collaborating on various things, might work well. I have now nominated the two article at DYK, and am starting the rather long task of adding links from existing Titanic articles. I'll also mention the two new articles on the talk pages of the articles on Titanic and its sinking, as that might help bring in other editors as well. I am also going to ask at WT:DYK if there is an outside chance of them being put up this week, to still catch some of the centenary feel (the US inquiry opened on 19 April), but I'm not sure whether that argument will fly for just these two articles. At the moment, the articles are mostly just basic facts and figures. There is a fair amount of opinion out there about them (in the vast literature about Titanic), but that will take time to add in a way that doesn't unbalance the articles. Also, the French Wikipedia has an article that combines the two topics. I only became aware of that after doing the two separately. Some articles refer to "the inquiries" (plural) and it is hard to link at that point, so maybe a brief overview page might help - it could include some of the less well known inquiries or hearings, such as something called the limitations of liabilities hearings, and something even more obscure, called the 'Second Bulkhead Committee' (established by the Board of Trade), and chaired by Archibald Denny, the same guy who unveiled one of the memorials (the Southampton one to the engineers, I think). Carcharoth (talk) 21:28, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * PS. I've added you to the nomination here, and I suspect you may end up expanding the other one as well, so feel free to add yourself there as well. I'm going to do the QPQ reviews for both (well, at least one tonight), unless you want to do one of those reviews as well? Carcharoth (talk) 22:58, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that. Don't think I'll have time to do the QPQs, to be honest, so could you take care of that? Prioryman (talk) 22:59, 18 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Will do. Could you leave a note on the DYK nomination pages when you've finished with the US one, and whether (or when) you intend to add stuff to the British one, as that will help the person who reviews the nomination, rather than have them reviewing a moving target? Carcharoth (talk) 23:08, 18 April 2012 (UTC) PPS. Do watch the dramatisation of the British Titanic inquiry that is available on the iPlayer if you get a chance, the link is at the end of the article and in the section I posted to Talk:Sinking of the RMS Titanic. I watched it yesterday, and it was an interesting take on things.

Update: I added you to the British inquiry DYK nomination here. Do you want to suggest an alternate hook there? QPQs are done, just waiting for someone to pick up the review. I did post to WT:DYK, but I think the moment may have passed, so may have to wait a while in the queue. Carcharoth (talk) 06:33, 21 April 2012 (UTC)
 * A little bit more. (1) Should we agree on hooks to make the reviews easier? (2) I found a useful image resource here. Search for "Titanic" and you get 6 hits. The ones of Lord Mersey may not be from the right period, but I thought you appreciate the one of the statue of Colonel Archibald Gracie IV and the one of Max Beckmann in front of his 'The Sinking of the Titanic'. Some of the images you found were excellent - may I ask where they were from (i.e. did you scan them yourself, or are the scans from somewhere else)? Also, have you had a chance to look at the talk pages of each article? Carcharoth (talk) 07:56, 24 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay in replying - have been away for a bit. Yes, I scanned those images myself. They're from original copies of The Graphic. I haven't had a chance to look at the talk pages but will do so today. I see one of the DYKs has been passed already - are you OK with my suggestion for the hook for the US Senate article? Prioryman (talk) 07:16, 27 April 2012 (UTC)
 * I would prefer one DYK goes up with a hook I suggested, and one with a hook you suggested, both having an image and in the lead position. The problem, though, is that the pictures you've suggested won't work well on the Main Page at the size they appear at (This image is about the worse sort to pick for a DYK image slot - it will just be a fuzz with nothing really visible). The British inquiry one is now in prep 1, but there is a dubious tag on the article that should really be sorted first. It would be nice as well for the articles to go up roughly British and then US time on the same day, but I'm not sure DYK can be that flexible. I'll ask Crisco 1492 who moved the British one to prep. I'm afraid that is all I'll have time for this weekend, so hopefully it will all work out. See Crisco's talk page if you can help out. Carcharoth (talk) 06:44, 28 April 2012 (UTC)

Briefly following up on a side-matter here. I had seen references to that play you mentioned, and had notes on it in my draft article, but it didn't make it into the version I saved (it should have done). An external link and something based on that Guardian article you mentioned would go nicely in the article. Do you have a link to the article if it is online? Never been to Northern Ireland, but I did consider asking someone to ask if pictures were possible for the article, unlikely but you never know. Can't remember how long it runs for. If there is independent coverage of the TV drama that was broadcast by BBC Northern Ireland (the one that included Paul McGann), that could be worth mentioning (currently only an external link). I did vaguely notice some other dramatisations done on the inquiry over the years (BBC radio, I think?), so a small section on all this might even be possible. Not sure how stable the article needs to be for DYK though. Carcharoth (talk) 23:31, 3 May 2012 (UTC)

Username Policy
Thank you for working to clarify the username policy. As changes here may affect the work performed by administrators working to review UAA I have asked for their input so we may see some other suggestions on the policy talkpage. Regards, 7  23:34, 29 April 2012 (UTC)

Leontina Albina Espinoza
Hello, I was looking through new pages for Mother's Day DYK hooks. I presume that's the intention of Leontina Albina Espinoza? If so, well done sir. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja 
 * Yes indeed. Not finished yet, but I'll flag it up on DYK shortly. There's a twist in the tale. :-) Prioryman (talk) 21:58, 2 May 2012 (UTC)

Bat'leth DYK
I've responded to your concerns for the Bat'leth DYK. I'm not sure a rewrite is nessecary as I've virtually removed the unencyclopedic canon section (which also included the stuff that was similar to the other page) and it is now (just) over the limit so it doesn't really need expansion. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've been able to expand it (somehow!) so it's over the limit now. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 12:48, 5 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Can you give it another lookover as I've done the required work to get it up to the character limit? The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 18:03, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

A kitten for you!
You seem like you need one for all you've been through.

Bearian (talk) 23:49, 3 May 2012 (UTC) 

On the topic of Mother's Day
I've nominated Mothers and Other Liars‎. ▫  Johnny Mr Nin ja  00:06, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

Seeking insight regarding "Forward (generic name of socialist publications)" AFD
Greetings! I hope I'm not intruding, I've just been wondering about a stance I've heard regarding the page, namely that it is a synthesis. I read the first citation, and though much of it seemed pertinent, let me focus on one part.

"Language both reflected socialist isolation and promoted socialist consciousness. For example, it was an important factor in distinguishing supporters of the German social democracy from other Germans.  Four particular words - vorwärts, Arbeiter, Genosse, and frei - took on distinctive connotations that made them special if not exclusive property of the social-democratic movement in the years before the first world war.  Vorwärts simply means "forward", but as a name for a journal or an organization such as a singing club, it was generally applied only to socialist undertakings."

(I bolded what I felt to be a pertinent section) I read that and I said okay, what is in the article seems sourced, but will it survive a notability challenge? The source refers to a limited time frame and limited geographical scope, should that factor in to its use as a citation, etc. What I've found (besides two clashing ideologies which both have seemed to decide that 'socialist' can only be a pejorative as opposed to something that has historical meaning) is that many people continue to argue synthesis. I can't edit there at the moment, but I wanted to ask something of you as you seemed experienced with the AFD process (by the way I found your argument pointing out the other AFD's closure, maintaining the knowledge for use in other articles, to be incredibly compelling).

Had you read the section I quoted above? If so is there a way I'm interpreting original research that misses some subtlety? I'm thinking I may return to the discussion since I was vocal to begin with and I might as well advance the conversation for my part, but in doing so I want my contribution to be as informed and reasoned as is possible. Thank you for your time! 68.229.93.129 (talk) 01:34, 5 May 2012 (UTC)

take a break
Please let other editors hammer out the details of the ban. Nobody Ent 17:33, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Ban wording
Does this work for you? (Please focus only on the wording and make no statements about the other editor). Nobody Ent 17:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I've posted a followup, which I'm afraid does necessarily raise an issue about what the other editor has said - but you'll understand why when you see, I hope. Prioryman (talk) 17:47, 6 May 2012 (UTC)

Can you agree to this?

''The community is imposing a binding interaction ban on Delicious Carbuncle and Prioryman. Each will not comment on, or otherwise interact with the other at any venue on Wikipedia. Reporting or otherwise mentioning the other editor is not permitted on Wikipedia. If either editor wishes to report a suspected violation of the interaction ban or has a question regarding the ban they will email any administrator of their choice. Per policy, appeals to the ban may be made to Arbcom.''

-- Avanu (talk) 19:58, 6 May 2012 (UTC)


 * That's not the same text as on AN/I. Which is the definitive version? Prioryman (talk) 20:42, 6 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Sorry, It was supposed to be. The only difference was the scope. DC mentioned that it would be difficult to enforce across a zillion subprojects of Wikimedia, and that seemed reasonable. If you edit a specific project other than Wikipedia, we could add that to the list. Otherwise this is the same version now that DC has already agreed to. -- Avanu (talk) 00:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)
 * OK, I've replied on the AN/I thread, which you can probably close off now if you want. Prioryman (talk) 08:56, 7 May 2012 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Black Stone
The article Black Stone you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Black Stone for comments about the article. Well done! There is a backlog of articles waiting for review, why not help out and review a nominated article yourself? GoP T C N 08:45, 11 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Human–animal breastfeeding
Orlady (talk) 08:02, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Leontina Albina Espinoza
Casliber (talk · contribs) 16:06, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Re: Erm what?
Thanks for catching that, it was completely unintentional. SwisterTwister  talk  01:04, 16 May 2012 (UTC)

GA nomination
Sorry, I was on a break. Can't advise you anyway, I don't get involved in that. Dougweller (talk) 14:27, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK nomination of Pont Flavien
Hello! Your submission of Pont Flavien at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and there still are some issues that may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Zanhe (talk) 21:29, 18 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Pont Flavien
Carabinieri (talk) 08:02, 21 May 2012 (UTC)

that link and summary is inappropriate
Hi. Please don't re-add that inappropriate summary. NE should be trouted or worse for that sweeping attack. You and Dan both mean well here. Br&#39;er Rabbit (talk) 19:22, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Titanic hooks have been merged
I wanted to let you know that after both hooks on the investigations were put into Prep 3, one after the other, Carabinieri subsequently merged them into a single hook. If you have a problem with this, or with the resulting double hook, you'll need to say something very soon. There's a discussion section in WT:DYK about it. BlueMoonset (talk) 02:47, 23 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for British Wreck Commissioner's inquiry into the sinking of the RMS Titanic
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 08:03, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

DYK for United States Senate inquiry into the sinking of the RMS Titanic
Graeme Bartlett (talk) 16:04, 24 May 2012 (UTC)

Titanic DYK page views
Just checking on the page views for those two Titanic DYKs, and the British inquiry (in the lead position with an image) got over 9000, while the US inquiry (in the second position in its set) got just under 5000. Nothing to match the 28,000 of Wreck of the RMS Titanic from March, but still not too bad compared to the other Titanic DYKs I found on DYKSTATS. Do you know where that listing of Titanic articles by page views that you compiled is? Carcharoth (talk) 07:27, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Yes, it's here, but I've not updated it recently - I'm going to completely redo it this weekend. Prioryman (talk) 07:30, 25 May 2012 (UTC)

BFM
Hi Prioryman, I've passed Bare-faced Messiah as a good article, good work on that. I've been working on William S. Sadler for a while, you might find that article interesting--there are some parallels between him and Hubbard. (Notable difference too, not the least of which is that Sadler was a psychiatrist.) Martin Gardner wrote one of the books I'm using for a source on Sadler, so it was interesting to see his name pop up in the review. Alright, BTW, I'll try to review your Iceland museum article, that looks quite interesting. Mark Arsten (talk) 02:56, 30 May 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!
Thought you might want to expand Taxatio Ecclesiastica.♦ Dr. Blofeld  11:54, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks very much! I'll take a look at that article as well... Prioryman (talk) 06:38, 31 May 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change
Resolved by motion that:

The restriction imposed on by Remedy 11.6 of the Climate change case ("ChrisO topic-banned") is hereby lifted.

For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 17:52, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Congratulations, I'm glad to see this restriction lifted. . . dave souza, talk 21:50, 30 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Thanks! Prioryman (talk) 06:36, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Well done. Now I'm afraid you have some vandalism to fix William M. Connolley (talk) 08:19, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I do? Where? Prioryman (talk) 22:15, 31 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I can commit some vandalism if it will help. Just let me know. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 00:29, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Is this some weird combination of the broken windows theory and Keynesian economics - throw stones through windows so that other people can be gainfully employed fixing the damage?
 * Anyway, I've got a challenge for the three of you: I celebrated my release from jail by filling in a red link on Michael E. Mann that had been bugging me for a while, to create an article on the Hans Oeschger Medal and its recipients. However, I've not been able to identify the host institutions of three of them. Any chance you could help fill in the blanks? Prioryman (talk) 00:33, 1 June 2012 (UTC)
 * Goddamn lazy kids these days. Go to Google Scholar, enter their name with a likely topic (e.g., "Dominique Reynaud ice core"), pull up one of their recent pubs and look at the author affiliations. Short Brigade Harvester Boris (talk) 01:04, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Notification
I mentioned you here. Cla68 (talk) 00:25, 1 June 2012 (UTC)

Arbitration motion regarding Requests for arbitration/Scientology
Resolved by motion that:

The restriction imposed on by Remedy 17 of the Scientology case ("ChrisO restricted") is hereby lifted.

For the Arbitration Committee, Lord Roem (talk) 02:41, 1 June 2012 (UTC)