Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The finals are upon us; we're down to the last few. One of the eight remaining contestants will be this year's WikiCup champion! 150 was the score needed to progress to the final; just under double the 76 required to reach round 4, and more than triple the 41 required to reach round 3. Our eight finalists are:
We say goodbye to our seven other semi-finalists, Another Believer (submissions),
Piotrus (submissions),
Grandiose (submissions),
Stone (submissions),
Eisfbnore (submissions),
Canada Hky (submissions) and
MuZemike (submissions). Everyone still in the competition at this stage has done fantastically well, and contributed greatly to Wikipedia. We're on the home straight now, and we will know our winner in two months.
In other news, preparations for next year's competition have begun with a brainstorming thread. Please, feel free to drop by and share any thoughts you have about how the competition should work next year. Sign ups are not yet open, but will be opened in due course. Watch this space. Further, there has been a discussion about the rule whereby those in the WikiCup must delcare their participation when nominating articles at featured article candidates. This has resulted in a bot being created by new featured article delegate Ucucha (talk · contribs). The bot will leave a message on FAC pages if the nominator is a participant in the WikiCup.
A reminder of the rules: any points scored after August 29 may be claimed for the final round, and please remember to update submission pages promptly. If you are concerned that your nomination, be it at good article candidates, a featured process or anywhere else, will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. However, please remember to continue to offer reviews at GAC, FAC and all the other pages that require them to prevent any backlogs which could otherwise be caused by the Cup. As ever, questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup and the judges are reachable on their talk pages, or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start receiving or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn and The ed17 00:15, 1 September 2011 (UTC)
|
Did Sturm answer your questions? - Dank (push to talk) 00:43, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 6, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 6, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 20:04, 3 September 2011 (UTC)
Almirante Latorre was a super-dreadnought battleship built for the Chilean Navy. She was the first of a planned two-ship class. Construction began soon after the ship was ordered in November 1911, and was approaching completion when she was bought by the United Kingdom's Royal Navy for use in the First World War. Commissioned in September 1915, she served in the Grand Fleet as HMS Canada for the duration of the war and saw action during the Battle of Jutland. Canada was repurchased by Chile in 1920. She took back her original name of Almirante Latorre, and served as Chile's flagship and frequently as presidential transport. In September 1931, crewmen aboard Almirante Latorre instigated a mutiny, which the majority of the Chilean fleet quickly joined. After divisions developed between the mutineers, the rebellion fell apart and the ships were returned to government control. Almirante Latorre was put into reserve for a time in the 1930s due to a severe economic depression, but she was in good enough condition to receive interest from the United States after the attack on Pearl Harbor. This was declined and the ship spent most of the Second World War on patrol for Chile. The elderly battleship was scrapped in Japan beginning in 1959. (more...)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Japanese battleship Tosa. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC) |
--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:27, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi mate, not sure when you're planning to put this month's paper to bed but if we still need an op-ed and there's a few hours to spare I could pen a reflection/observation on September 11 that's been playing in my mind -- nothing too radical, more a recollection of the impact at the time, and a reminder about victims and survivors, and soldiers deployed as a result of the attack. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 04:58, 7 September 2011 (UTC)
Since i couldnt type it all in the history box in the page ill say it hear,
Ed your joking. I was helping out that guy out and directing him to the relevant pages , something that you and many admins do praticially everyday. Besides i found it unfair that everyone is moaning at dapi to come back, hes probably having a hard time; something that i know all to well.
Removing posts like this is totally bad faith on your part , tell me what is wrong with this?
Im afriad people move on see Wikipedia:VOLUNTEER and Wikipedia:Retiring From what i gather/believe Dapi had a dispute with one or more administrators which eventually led to him being banned for a week or so. Wikipedia:Banning_policy Although at any rate, he decided to retire due to personal problems/stress. It happens. We'll all experience it from time to time. Theres plenty of other editors anyway, if you want some advice or any quieries/questions regarding modern history (i.e ,1900-1982 although i do know a fair bit about the Napoleonic wars and the german and italian unifcation wars in the 1800s) Then im the guy to ask. Goldblooded (talk) 01:28, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
I was helping the guy who wanted him to come back (i dont think english is his fist languge anyway) so i'd thought id just point out a few links and he seemed to wanted to question dapi about history or something along that lines so i put myself forward instead. Whats wrong with that? I was helpfull, assumed good faith and i offered myself foward.
Removing edits like that, as ive said is completely bad faith, perhaps the other thing i said to that other guy was a bit more heated -
- Give the guy a break, See WP:VOLUNTEER If he doesn't want to come back then he wont, If he does then he'll come back of his own accord; by the sounds of things he seemed rather stressed and worn out and moaning at him isn't going to help. Goldblooded (talk) 01:31, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
All i was saying was that if hes gunna come back he'll do it if not he wont , moaning at him wont help. And it wont.
So anyway i've seen you around before and ive noticed that you seem to have some sort of alliance with certain members on wikipedia and as i said theres no reason at all to remove my posts when im talking to them, Paticulary when im trying to help out. Give the newbies a chance. No wonder 100s of possible new wikipedians get scared away by admins. You should be greatfull that i actually decided to stay on wikipedia. Goldblooded (talk) 17:56, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough but it does seem that way also on Dapi's own page but anyway i assume your watching Parsecboy's page so i've already given a reply there. Goldblooded (talk) 18:14, 8 September 2011 (UTC)
Ed, can you look over Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/HMS Hood (51)/archive1 to see if I've addressed your issues?--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 15:25, 10 September 2011 (UTC)
I made some adjustments here. Use a test page first so you don't send a silly message out to a lot of people. You'll have to make a test list somewhere. Also, when the bot signs, it'll sign as itself. Usually you want to put your user name/talk page/etc. links in there directly and then just insert a timestamp (with five tildes). Hope that helps. --MZMcBride (talk) 16:57, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
|
To receive this newsletter on your talk page, join the project or sign up here. If you are a member who does not want delivery, please go to this page. EdwardsBot (talk) 18:48, 11 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ed,
Just to let you know that the Featured Picture File:USS New Jersey (BB-16) in camouflage coat, 1918 edit.jpg is due to make an appearance as Picture of the Day on September 13, 2011. If you get a chance, you can check and improve the caption at Template:POTD/2011-09-13. howcheng {chat} 18:09, 12 September 2011 (UTC)
Hope all is well, Ed17. I need some guidance on some articles that I have written that are going through the editorial meat-grinder courtesy of Buckshot06 and GraemeLeggett.
Okay, I am fine with the re-branding of the first two articles listed above. However, the wholesale elimination of background information, particularly the strategic overview, removes the historic context for these military exercises. Finally, I think it is bad policy and disrespectful for these editors to make such sweeping changes to articles that I created, and would not exist except through my efforts, without first consulting me and discussing these changes. This is contrary to what Wikipedia is suppose to be and not consistent to a spirit of collaboration. Sorry I am tossing this to you, but you have always been reasonable and fair-minded, as well as being an early sponsor for Operation Strikeback.Marcd30319 (talk) 11:47, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
On Ed17 talk page, Graeme Leggett noted that: "I think some common approach is needed on NATO exercise articles. On the one hand, some degree of background is necessary for each article to be put into context: eg with respect to current doctrine or the results of the previous similar exercise, or a change in the political situation. On the other hand, I think largely political rather than operational viewpoints are too distant from the point and overlong quotes are not useful - deprecated even per MoS etc. Is this something worth flagging up at the MilHist talkpages?" Given the fact that the Eisenhower administration developed its so-called "New Look" approach in defense strategy which emphasized massive retaliation, and this policy represents an evolution from the containment policy of the Truman administration. Also, for the U.S. Navy, historian Samuel P. Huntington set forth a naval strategy oriented to naval operation in the Mediterranean Sea. This strategic background is appropriate and essential to understanding the historical context for NATO exercises in 1957. This assertion that this is covered by other articles is not appropriate approach and does a disservice to our user audience. I therefore reverts the edited text to the original content. See talk page for this article.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
The suggestion that this background information is duplicative and unnecessary is an absolute non sequitur. Please note that Naval Striking and Support Forces Southern Europe did not exist at the time of such earlier NATO Southern Region military exercise as 1952's Exercise Longstep and 1952's Exercise Grand Slam. In fact, Naval Striking and Support Forces Southern Europe (STRIKFORSOUTH) was created after the creation of Allied Forces Mediterranean (AFMED) under Lord Mountbatten, and STRIKFORSOUTH was created to maintain American control over U.S. nuclear weapons on U.S. Sixth Fleet aircraft carrier in accordance with the McMahon Act. Therefore, this background information on the command structure for Operation Deep Water is approbriate. Consequently, the assertion that this information is covered by other articles is incorrect and also does a disservice to our user audience to exclude this information for this article. I therefore reverts the edited text to the original content. See talk page for this article.Marcd30319 (talk) 13:29, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
Just a reminder to sign (~~~~) the Memorandum of Understanding at Wikipedia:United States Education Program/MOU/sign for the pods for the courses you have signed up for. -- Donald Albury 20:47, 16 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
Four Award | |
Congratulations! You have been awarded the Four Award for your work from beginning to end on Brazilian cruiser Bahia. TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC) |
--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello! This is a note to let the main editors of this article know that it will be appearing as the main page featured article on September 23, 2011. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/September 23, 2011. If you think it is necessary to change the main date, you can request it with the featured article directors Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions of the suggested formatting. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page so Wikipedia doesn't look bad. :D Thanks! Tbhotch.™ Grammatically incorrect? Correct it! See terms and conditions. 19:57, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
ARA Moreno was a dreadnought battleship designed by the American Fore River Shipbuilding Company for the Argentine Navy (Armada de la República Argentina). Named after Mariano Moreno, a key member of the first independent government of Argentina, the First Assembly (Primera Junta), Moreno was the second ship in the Rivadavia class. Argentina placed orders for Moreno and her only sister ship, Rivadavia, in response to a Brazilian naval building program and border disputes, particularly in the River Plate area. During their construction, the two dreadnoughts were subject to numerous rumors involving Argentina selling the two battleships to a country engaged in the First World War, but these proved to be false. After Moreno was completed in March 1915, a series of engine problems occurred during her sea trials which delayed her delivery to Argentina to May 1915. The next decade saw the ship based in Puerto Belgrano as part of the Argentine Navy's First Division before sailing to the United States for an extensive refit in 1924 and 1925. During the 1930s the ship was occupied with diplomatic cruises to Brazil, Uruguay, and Europe until the Second World War broke out. Decommissioned in 1949, Moreno was scrapped in Japan beginning in 1957. (more...)
Hello, The ed17/Archives. I see that you are a member of WP:OMT. I am reminding you that there is a discussion [here] about whther or not to award Bahamut0013, a member of OMt who passsed awsay a short while ago, the Titan's Cross in silver. your opinion will be welcome. Thanks, Buggie111 (talk) 14:04, 18 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The TomStar81 Spelling Award | |
Be it known to all members of Wikipedia that The ed17/Archives has corrected my god-awful spelling on the page User talk:bahamut0013, and in doing so has made an important and very significant contribution to the Wikipedia community, thereby earning this TomStar81 Spelling Award and my deepest thanks. Keep up the good work! TomStar81 (Talk) 09:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC) |
I suppose I should qualify this one by saying that I do wish I was issuing it under better circumstances. For that matter, I'm sure you wish you were receiving it under better circumstances. Still, though, thanks for the copyedit. TomStar81 (Talk) 09:23, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Hey Ed, I was thinking of working on this article, to get it to at least GA standard, and I had a question. A number of sources I've seen (including Conways and Ian Allan's Italian Warships of World War II) call it the Littorio class. A simple google books search seems to prefer Littorio (nearly 600 hits vs 140 for Vittorio Veneto). FWIW, the USN also called them the Littorio class during the war. Anyway, I saw you were the one who moved it to the current name a couple years ago, and wondered how you felt about changing it back? Parsecboy (talk) 17:46, 19 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi, Ed. I don't have it here with me right now, but I'm going to travel and visit my parents in a couple of weeks and then I could check it out and bring it back with me. What are you looking for? --Lecen (talk) 21:35, 22 September 2011 (UTC)
Is that a South American Battleship I see as a featured article? Nice work :] – GorillaWarfare (talk) 02:01, 23 September 2011 (UTC)
![]() |
The WikiChevrons | |
For your tireless efforts to educate us on our "A-B-C" battleships.
- The Bushranger One ping only 20:13, 23 September 2011 (UTC) |
Hi Ed, my name is Tom Peters User:bythefire and I am a member of Professor Tess Marchant-Shapiro's User:Marchantshapiro Political Participation class. She has you listed as our Online Ambassador. I hope I am writing to the correct person and I hope to be able to use you as a resource in the future. Bythefire (talk) 19:09, 24 September 2011 (UTC) Excellent, Thank you for the information Ed. I look forward to working with you in the near future. Bythefire (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2011 (UTC)
Hello Ed. I've just been updated my page to get ready to move over but when I have switch it on the main page and press preview I get the messages: "The topic of this article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. Please help to establish notability by adding reliable, secondary sources about the topic. If notability cannot be established, the article is likely to be merged, redirected, or deleted. (October 2011)" and "This article needs additional citations for verification. Please help improve this article by adding citations to reliable sources. Unsourced material may be challenged and removed. (August 2010)". I believe I went a little over-the-top with references, but obviously not! The first one concerns me because I don't want to update the page and then my account get suspended because the article may not meet the notability guidelines for companies and organizations. How would I go about fixing these problems before I transfer my sandbox to the main article ? Thank you, Chris. ChrisMcBSCSU (talk) 04:57, 17 October 2011 (UTC)
Hey there, Ed! I've been approached by a couple of students from the above referenced course, requesting that I work with them as mentor. After a quick glance at the page linked above, I see that much of the course and a few articles directly correlate to my professional background. I would like to sign on as a second OA to support the class. Out of respect, I wanted to contact you first. Do you think the class could use another OA? What are your thoughts? Cind.amuse (Cindy) 19:59, 25 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ed, just a heads up... Julie from the Political Participation class contacted me regarding mentorship. I told her that you are the online ambassador of the class and would be mentoring the students in the class. Bejinhan talks 04:19, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hey Ed, your page looks good, I'm trying to get on your level. Regards Stanleya3 (talk) 12:28, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi Ed!
I checked out your page and it is one to be admired. I look forward to working with you this semester!
Thanks,
Juliejones24 (talk) 18:59, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
Hi,
My name is Laura. I am currently working on the The National Law Center on Homelessness and Poverty article. I am working on this article as an assignment for my political science class. I am wondering if you will be my mentor?
Laura.Muro2 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 26 September 2011 (UTC).
Hello Ed, my name is Winston I am a Political Science major at Southern Connecticut State University. The topic I will be working on deals with the American Gas Association. I was hoping you can be my mentor for this project; it would be very helpful to learn more abouth the basics and the fundementals on how to write a wikipedia page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Winstonhry (talk • contribs) 19:05, 26 September 2011 (UTC)
I am looking forward to working with you this semester Ed.
Bvandell22 (talk) 14:35, 19 October 2011 (UTC)
I am wondering what should I do because my organization the National Union of Students Black Students' Campaign branched off the National Union of Students and the only information about the organization is on the website so im wondering what should i do? ive tried to contact ambassadors and everything and this project is beginning to confuse me.
Ronald06514 —Preceding undated comment added 00:20, 10 October 2011 (UTC).
Hello, Ambassadors!
I wanted to give you one last update on where we are this term, before my role as Online Facilitator wraps up at the end of this week. Already, there are over 800 students in U.S. classes who have signed up on course pages this term. About 40 classes are active, and we're expecting that many more again once all the classes are up and running.
On a personal note, it's been a huge honor to work with so many great Wikipedians over the last 15 months. Thanks so much to everyone who jumped in and decided to give the ambassador concept a try, and double thanks those of you who were involved early on. Your ideas and insights and enthusiasm have been the foundation of the program, and they will be the keys the future of the program.
Still waiting to get involved with a class this term, or ready to take on more? We have seven classes that are already active and need OA support, and eleven more that have course pages started but don't have active students yet. Please consider joining one or more of these pods!
Active courses that really need Online Ambassadors:
Courses that may be active soon that need Online Ambassadors:
--Sage Ross - Online Facilitator, Wikimedia Foundation (talk) 23:15, 27 September 2011 (UTC)
Nyttend (talk) 01:01, 28 September 2011 (UTC)
I am pleased to inform you that you have been elected as a coordinator of the Military history WikiProject. Congratulations on your achievement, and thank you for volunteering!
Discussions of our plans for the coming year will no doubt begin in the next few days. In the meantime, please make sure that you have the coordinators' discussion page on your watchlist, as most of the relevant activity happens there. If you have not already done so, you may want to read the relevant courses in the project academy, as well as the discussion page and its recent archives.
If you have any questions about your work as a coordinator, or anything else, please don't hesitate to ask me directly. Kirill [talk] [prof] 02:03, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
Thank you Muchas gracias, merci, vielen Dank and many thanks for your trust and voting me into the team of coordinators. MisterBee1966 (talk) 07:57, 29 September 2011 (UTC)
I just noticed this and I wanted to tell you that I really appreciated what you said. Thank you. --John (talk) 07:47, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Congrats on your election as Coordinator of the Military history Project! In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. Parsecboy (talk) 22:08, 30 September 2011 (UTC)
Seamless Wikipedia browsing. On steroids.
Every time you click a link to Wikipedia, Wiktionary or Wikiquote in your browser's search results, it will show the modern Wikiwand interface.
Wikiwand extension is a five stars, simple, with minimum permission required to keep your browsing private, safe and transparent.