Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hanford Engineer Works/archive1

Hanford Engineer Works

 * Nominator(s): Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:32, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

This article was split from Hanford Site. During the FAR of Hanford Site, I decided to create a new article on the World War II establishment. This brings it into line with the articles on Los Alamos, Berkeley and Oak Ridge, all of which have subarticles on their role in the Manhattan Project. The sources complain about how Hanford has been overlooked compared with Los Alamos and Oak Ridge. This seems to be the case, but not for any scarcity of sources.

On Wikipedia the fault is mine. I began overhauling the Manhattan Project articles over ten years ago, but did not deal with Hanford, because Hanford Site was already a featured article. I did gather material though, and overhauling Hanford Site for its FAR made me aware of how poor the coverage of Hanford was compared with the other sites. So I took the opportunity to create this article.

It is a subarticle of both that article and Manhattan Project, and covers the site during the years of the Manhattan Project. The article contains a lot of beautiful images, many of which I located and uploaded specifically for it. The article has recently passed an A-class review that included source and image reviews.

Support from PM
I recently reviewed this excellent article at Milhist A-Class, and consider it meets all the FA criteria. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:09, 2 March 2024 (UTC)

Support / Image review from Adam Cuerden
I've done an image review at WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Hanford Engineer Works, and would support the promotion of this article. I mean, I'm sure others will pick apart the text more than I, but I'm very happy with the images. Adam Cuerden (talk)Has about 8.8% of all FPs. 01:38, 3 March 2024 (UTC)

Support Comments from JennyOz
Placeholder for now, will take a while. But... Hawkeye, I was just making my way up from bottom of FAC page and this nom doesn't appear there? JennyOz (talk) 07:26, 6 March 2024 (UTC)
 * That's odd... the FACBot normally complains if a review has not been transcluded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Heightened security on email. Should be working again now. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  04:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

Hi Hawkeye, told you it'd take a while! Lots of questions, most just for confirmation of intention. It was heavy going to read this as someone with very little knowledge of its subjects but I did find it very interesting and informative. I doublechecked it against the Hanford Site article and whilst there is a little unavoidable overlap, I find both articles can stand alone very well. I've added some Misc notes at end which you might (or not) prefer to read first.

I still though, per my note above of 6 March, don't understand why this nomination appears on here but not on here???

lede
 * The acquisition was not completed before Manhattan Project ended in December 1946 - the Manhattan?
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The site suffered an outage on 10 March 1945 - The Works?
 * Sure. Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The Manhattan Project ended on 31 December 1946 and control of the Hanford site passed - site and works?
 * The whole site actually but used HEW for consistency. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Contractor selection
 * Approximately four tonnes of uranium was required to produce one kilogram of plutonium - no conversions intentional?
 * Yes. Metric is the customary unit for fissile metals, just as troy is for precious ones. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * seemed beyond human capability."[9] - move full stop out?
 * It is there in the original, so okay. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * met with Dupont's executive committee - DuPont's
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Groves assured Dupont's president - DuPont's
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Dupont initially refused payment, - DuPont
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Land acquisition
 * White Bluffs - link White Bluffs, Washington
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Rattlesnake Mountain - link Rattlesnake Mountain (Benton County, Washington)
 * What a great name. Sounds like something out of those 1950s westerns. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * were based in Seattle, or Portland and - is comma needed?
 * Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * during the Great Depression. - refine link to Great Depression in the United States?
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * and Justice Departments - change link to US federal ie United States Department of Justice rather than generic article?
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Priest Rapids -link
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Township
 * two fruit packing warehouses - add hyphen fruit-packing
 * Hyphenated. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Two types of barracks were erected: two-wing barracks for women and four-wing barracks for men. White and non-white people had separate barracks. Barracks construction commenced on 6 April 1943 and eventually 195 barracks were erected - that's 6x barracks. I reckon the 3rd and 5th (or 6th) can go?
 * Only two types. White and non-white, and men and women were separated. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Sorry, was not alluding to number of types, I was mentioning the 6x repetition of the word "barracks".
 * My suggestions reduced them to 4;
 * Two types of barracks were erected: two-wing barracks for women and four-wing barracks for men. White and non-white people had separate barracks. Barracks construction commenced on 6 April 1943 and eventually 195 barracks were erected.
 * Or, in last sentence, Barracks 'Construction commenced on 6 April 1943 and eventually 195 barracks were erected, ...' JennyOz (talk) 08:21, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  18:09, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * There were 110 for white men, 21 for black men, 57 for white women and seven for black women. - numeral 7 per mos
 * Enumerated. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Not all were used for accommodation, and one white-women wing was turned over to the Women's Army Corps. - if not for accommodation what did WACs use it for? (And... what was role of WACs at Hanford?)
 * Added a bit about this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thanks for adding info re WACs etc. "She established a Red Cross and a scout troop", to "Red Cross" add branch/group/unit? And maybe dab to American Red Cross? JennyOz (talk) 09:28, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * For heating, they had a wood- or coal-burning stove in each unit - mention temps at Hanford?
 * There's a chart back in the Hanford Site article. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * In all, 820 double huts and 272 single huts were bought from the Pacific Huts company in Seattle - were they Quonset huts? (per "This design was conjured in the Seattle area and was termed the Pacific Hut." yeah not RS and per Camp Columbia (Hanford) and this. Your sources do not name them?
 * No, but there were Quonset huts at the HEW. From the look of it, this was a design with sloped rooves.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * one aligned north–south and the other east-west. Both were 200 feet (61 m) wide, but the north-south runway was 4,000 feet (1,200 m) long and the east–west only - 2x dashes v 2x hyphens
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * tendered the lowest bid of $103,005.30 - is the 30 cents important?
 * Basically there to show that the Army took quotes to the penny. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * 23,000,000 board feet - link Board foot
 * Um, sure. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Richland
 * which was already being acquired, instead. - "instead" is redundant?
 * Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The citizens of Richland were given until 15 November 1943 - no date was given at "Richland was chosen", so for context, how long were the citizens given?
 * Said up above that the acquisition was announced in February 1943. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The village plan initially called for a village of 6,500 people - 2x village, second one can go?
 * Deleted the first. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Two 5,000-kilowatt and one 10,000-kilowatt substation were built - plural substations
 * Changed. Note that metric is the customary unit for electric power. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Personnel
 * About thirteen percent were women, and 16.45 percent - mos, both words or both numerals
 * Changed. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Matthias instituted a five-and-a-half-day and then a six-day work week - in that order?
 * Yes. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * An eight-week campaign against absenteeism among the construction workforce reduced the rate of absenteeism from 9.8 percent - 2x absenteeism, second one can go?
 * Sure. Deleted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * would fly them from their home state - fly them in (or that just me hearing fifo so often?)
 * Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The first of them arrived at the Hanford Engineer Works on 1 September. - add year?
 * 1944. Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Facilities
 * The ideal canning substance had a high resistance to corrosion by water, a low capacity for absorbing neutrons, and be capable of transmitting heat to the cooling water. - "be" seems wrong in this statement, swap to 'was'?
 * Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * This involved cleaning the slug with carbon tetrachloride and sprayed with - tense spraying?
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * would normally run at 65 °C (149 °F), well below - this is only temp C-->F
 * The sources are inconsistent. Apparently, when work needs to be done, Americans switch to Celsius. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * laminated steel and masonite sheets, - masonite (x5) is brand name ie needs cap M?
 * Uppercased. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Separation
 * In the original plan there was to be eight separation plants - were to be?
 * Corrected. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Operations
 * would require only a few kilograms of plutonium - convert
 * Yes. Metric is the customary unit for fissile metals, just as troy is for precious ones. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * containing kilogram-quantity shipments - convert?
 * On 10 March 1945, a Japanese balloon bomb struck a high-tension line running between Grand Coulee and Bonneville. This caused an electrical surge in the lines to the reactors. - did the Japanese know what Hanford was processing or just a coincidence in locality?
 * No, they had no idea. But it caused quite a scare at the Manhattan District. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Postwar
 * Possible replacement companies... - explain intention of keeping Hanford operating now war over?
 * What do you want me to say? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I don't know! I suppose I expected it would be shut down at end of war, so wondered if these replacement companies were for wind-down operations, or if Hanford was to continue processing with no planned end date. I've read a bit more so I'm fine for you to leave it as is. JennyOz (talk) 09:50, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Until news arrived of the atomic bombing of Hiroshima, - add 6 August ie 'of the 6 August atomic bombing of Hiroshima'?
 * Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * adjacent to its research centre in - center
 * Always one of those. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * During the Cold War, - link?
 * Linked. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * sixty thousand weapons built for the U.S. nuclear arsenal - this is only use of "U.S." ie with dots
 * Undotted. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * The United States Department of Energy (DOE) offers free guided tours of the site, which can be reserved via the department's website. - obviously not intentional but unfortunately that sounds like an ad? Maybe drop "free" and change "which can be reserved via the department's website" to just 'via its website'. And DOE acronym not needed?
 * Cut back. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

References Images
 * Gerber, Michele (June 1996) - chrono, move up?
 * Michele Gerber is the historian in residence at the Hanford Site. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Nichols, Kenneth (1987). The Road to Trinity: A Personal Account of How America’s Nuclear - curly apos
 * Removed. Another editor likes Nichols's autobiography but I am wary of it. (I think it was written by Stephane Groueff) Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * no alts?
 * I'll think about it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Image caption "Aerial view of 300 Area in 1944" - use lowercase for 'area' to match accompanying text?
 * Um, okay. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Image caption "Front face of B reactor in 2013" - use cap R
 * Capped. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Tables
 * Table Reactor startup - 'Charging completed' column is alone aligned right intentionally or make all columns right aligned? (and per Land acquisition table and Housing authorized table)
 * Aligned left. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)

Misc
 * Please add Use American English template - if only to help stop the itch to "fix" aluminum:)
 * Added. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * HEW is used in lede a lot and then once in Site selection section but not thereafter, ie Hanford Engineer Works is used - intentional?
 * Pretty much. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hanford site (x6) v Hanford Site (x2)
 * Uppercased. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I noticed when checking some links that the articles of eg Franklin Matthias, B Reactor, DuPont, etc have prose/links to Hanford site - should any be changed to this Works article?
 * Yes. This article was forked from Hanford Site. So the latter now mainly deals with the post-war era. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Manhattan Project is dmy, Hanford Site is mdy and Hanford Engineer Works is dmy - all intentional because MP and HEW are military but HS more a civilian area?
 * Yes. It reflects the sources too. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)
 * I'm wondering about work hours. I'd guess some workers were in plants at all times. Did plants etc operate 24/7? Anything about workers' shifts in sources?
 * Yes, the reactors ran 24/7. The workers worked eight-hour shifts.  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  11:09, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Found a source for this and added it to the article. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

That's me. Let me know any problems with my comments. JennyOz (talk) 07:49, 14 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Everything okay now? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  04:22, 18 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Hi, I've added 3 clarifications above and have one new question for you...


 * explosives department under Roger Williams known as TNX. - change "known as" to 'code named' eg this?
 * Pretty sure that's the last from me. JennyOz (talk) 12:33, 18 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Nothing more of any importance so happy to add s'port. JennyOz (talk) 00:50, 20 March 2024 (UTC)

Source reviewish
Source formatting seems consistentish. Is Plutopia a reliable source? Leslie Groves was pretty deeply involved in the project, can we rely on his word in #177 and similar? I didn't notice any source that blatantly did not belong and the sauces used seem like the ones you'd expect on this topic, but this is hardly my field of expertise. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 07:53, 21 March 2024 (UTC)


 * Plutopia is a reliable source. It has won multiple prizes for historical works. The author, Kate Brown, is a is a Professor of Science, Technology and Society at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology.
 * Groves's book is widely cited. In fact by all of the sources cited in the article except those written before it was published, including the official history. Groves was critical of historians who relied entirely on documents. Most of the references refer to his own motivations, or are duplicated by other sources. The outlier is, oddly enough, fn 177. When I double-checked I found another version of the story, cited by the National Parks Service in which the sum is 32 cents. I'm going with Groves's and DuPont's version, which makes more cents, but am willing to remove the sentence if it is a problem. (Maybe  will know more.)  Hawkeye7   (discuss)  20:29, 21 March 2024 (UTC)

Kusma (support)
Reviewing.
 * Lead: "The HEW erected 554 buildings". I may be misunderstanding things, but if the HEW it is a "nuclear production complex" I don't see how it can erect buildings; that would have been the HEW's owners?
 * The HEW was an organisation. Attempted clarify this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "Construction commenced in March 1943 on a massive and technically challenging construction project." perhaps do not duplicate "construction" here?
 * Deleted second "construction". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Site selection: "Physicists at the Metallurgical Laboratory were more sanguine; Eugene Wigner claimed they could be built on the Potomac River near Washington, DC" here "they" are the reactors, not the physicists. It might also be better to first say what the security concerns before explaining that Wigner dismissed them.
 * Attempted to clarify that they were talking about safety rather than security. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "for planning purposes it was intended ... The ideal site was described by eight criteria:" I think it would be great to state in this section when exactly this planning took place.
 * This was the plan at the meeting with DuPont in December 1942. Obviously some thought went into it beforehand. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Land acquisition: perhaps remind us who Stimson was
 * Is this necessary? Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * It is not strictly necessary in the sense that (a) it would be a silly point to oppose over and (b) you have introduced him. My point is that I read this and thought "huh, who's that? Sounds like a powerful guy" and had to ctrl-F him (easy on my laptop, hard on mobile) so another word about him would be helpful. Perhaps it should be embarrassing for me that I don't know him. —Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Changed it to "Secretary Stimson" to remind people. I don't think he is well known at all anymore. To the people interested in the Manhattan Project, he is still a leading figure, and it has become what he is best known for. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "Area E, which was acquired only if necessary" shouldn't this be "was to be acquired only if necessary"?


 * Re-worded. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Hanford: "Construction was expedited by locating them on the sites of existing villages, where they could take advantage of the buildings" who are "they"?
 * The construction camp and the operating village. Added, at the risk of excessive repetition. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * What is a "hutment"? It redirects to shanty town.
 * Military term. Linked to the wiktionary definition. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "Groves released construction workers working on barracks by purchasing hutments." how did purchasing hutments release construction workers?
 * Provides accommodation without the need for construction workers building it. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "The school closed on 13 February 1945" do we know why?
 * The Army built a nuclear reactor complex nearby, and the town of Hanford was abandoned. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Indeed, but in the article this is only mentioned two paragraphs later. —Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "The subcontractor ran afoul of wartime regulations requiring the company to hire local drivers, and the International Brotherhood of Teamsters, who cited safety issues." can you make this easier to understand, also for people who don't know that the International Brotherhood of Teamsters is a union? Is it the union referred to in the sentence "He negotiated a settlement with the union"?
 * Yes, it is. Changed to "International Brotherhood of Teamsters union" Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Health and safety: do we know of any cases of radiation sickness or long term injury caused by radioactive materials?
 * Not from the wartime period per se; the postwar period is covered in Hanford Site Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Fabrication: "Metal Fabrication and Testing (500) Area" what about the 500? is this the area designated 500? where is that on the map?
 * Ooops! Typo. It should be the 300 Area. (For a moment there I thought I would have to explain about the 500 Area.) Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Irradiation: maybe remind us again who TNX is
 * Sigh. Another editor wanted more specifics. Originally I had just said "Wilmington". Changed to "the TNX Department at DuPont in Wilmington". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "each reactor would require 30,000 US gallons per minute" gallons of cooling water
 * Changed as suggested. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Why is the section called "irradiation"? A lot of it is about water and reactor construction
 * More of a literary device: Fabrication -> Irradiation -> Separation. Which is the industrial process. The purpose of the reactor was to produce plutonium through irradiation of uranium. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Do we know how much helium was used for the cooling?
 * No, we don't. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Xenon-135: I don't understand whether they did anything about the Xenon-135, or just loaded the reactor differently.
 * Loaded the reactor with more fuel to increase the neutron flux. The Xenon-135 was "burned" and produced Xenon-136, which is stable. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Separation: "separate the plutonium in the irradiated slugs from the uranium" how long were the slugs irradiated for? the "irradiation" section did not say
 * Depends. Added a paragraph about this. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * OK, so they were in the reactor for something like a few days, not weeks. —Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * A few weeks. The exact details have been deleted by the censor. Apparently, that information is still classified. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  19:20, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Operations: there is some context missing here. It would be helpful to explain that both Thin Man and Fat Man were plutonium based, and what the problem with Thin Man was, and how much plutonium they needed.


 * I don't want to get into it too deeply, as the article is long, and the subject is covered elsewhere. Added some more explanation. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "On 1 May four tubes in D reactor were loaded with 264 slugs containing bismuth. The irradiated bismuth slugs were shipped to Los Alamos for processing" is this connected to the polonium production or is it a separate thing?
 * Separate. Bismuth is irradiated to produce polonium, and "polonium was required for the Fat Man's neutron initiators". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * "There was intense pressure [...] to produce more plutonium [..] in late July for operational use." is the (fairly euphemistic) "operational use" just Fat Man?
 * Yes. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Postwar: from 1947, was the complex no longer called "Hanford Engineer Works"? Was there a new name for the facilities?
 * It was no longer called the HEW, because it was no longer a military facility after 1 January 1947. Instead, it became known as the "Hanford Site". Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

A very detailed article about an important part of the Manhattan project. Excellent work, but I think a few clarifications would help. —Kusma (talk) 22:38, 22 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your review. Much appreciated. Hawkeye7   (discuss)  01:27, 23 March 2024 (UTC)
 * Happy with responses. Of course I have a different opinion on a few issues, but I am happy to support whether you do something about them or not. —Kusma (talk) 17:16, 23 March 2024 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:45, 30 March 2024 (UTC)