User talk:TomStar81/Archive 4

| edit count | edit summary usage

Welcome to my talk page! Please feel free to leave a message here, or email me if you prefer; however, if you post here you I ask that you observe the following requests: Place new messages at the bottom of the page, not at the top. This preserves the chronological order for the page. Separate topic sections with a ==Descriptive header== Sign your posts with four tildes (~~~~). BE POLITE. I am a person, not a computer. I do have feelings, and they can be hurt. Solicitors are welcome here, but do not twist my arm to do something. Its my decision, not yours. Do not post in the archive(s). I will not answer any post placed on a page that is mothballed. Unless otherwise noted I will respond on your talk page, not mine.

Archives Archive 1 (September 2004-August 2006) Archive 2 (August 2006-July 2007) Archive 3 (July 2007-November 2007)

Missing image Image:061019-A-7603F-151.jpg

Hello, this is a message from an automated bot. A tag has been placed on Image:061019-A-7603F-151.jpg, by another Wikipedia user, requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. The tag claims that it should be speedily deleted because Image:061019-A-7603F-151.jpg is an image page for a missing or corrupt image or an empty image description page for a Commons-hosted image.

To contest the tagging and request that administrators wait before possibly deleting Image:061019-A-7603F-151.jpg, please affix the template {{hangon}} to the page, and put a note on its talk page. If the article has already been deleted, see the advice and instructions at WP:WMD. Feel free to contact the bot operator if you have any questions about this or any problems with this bot, bearing in mind that this bot is only informing you of the nomination for speedy deletion; it does not perform any nominations or deletions itself. CSDWarnBot 08:33, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Image talk:USS Kentucky (BBG-1) concept artwork.jpg

Just wanted to let you know that I've contacted another admin to review what has transpired on this page and possibly bring a voice of clarity.-MBK004 09:54, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Thankyou

Just a quick note of thanks for the welcome message you left on my talk page. I'll try not to pester you unless I get hopelessly confused learning the ropes :-) Parsival74 18:51, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

USS Illinois (BB-65)

Thanks for that reminder. Thankfully, there wasn't an edit conflict since the article hadn't been edited since the 8th. Hope you don't mind that I went ahead and expanded this one, I know your mission is to improve all the articles related to the Iowas. To that end, I think they could become a Featured Topic and we are very close: My checklist. Do you think I should go ahead and take Illinois to A-Class review?-MBK004 04:54, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Something has come up in the review and I would appreciate your opinion.--- MBK004 (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for handling the issues that came up while I was unable to access a computer today. -MBK004 (talk) 02:54, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Just noticed that the fate part in the infobox says dismantled in drydock, but the picture shows her on a slipway. Also, in the fate section it says both. I haven't read anything suggesting that the hull was ever moved to a drydock for dismantling. I understand that the old wording was ambiguous in the sense that only those who knew the terminology understood, but shouldn't we be accurate? -MBK004 (talk) 03:22, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

Understood, although it still bugs me, yet I don't know of any cite about whether the ship was broken up on the ways or in drydock. I've composed a bit to go in the fate section to comply with concerns from the review, but I'd like another set of eyes before I insert the line into the article. It is here: User:MBK004/Sandbox#Illinois Fate. Please feel free to edit the section, disregarding the instructions at the top of the page. -MBK004 (talk) 04:16, 23 November 2007 (UTC)

You've got mail. Also, please take a look at the FAC. There have been some issues that have come-up. I'm not quite sure if the opposition is just based on the length or on actual merit. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:18, 5 December 2007 (UTC)

USS Texas (BB-35)

While I was taking a look at all the USN battleship articles, I noticed that you extensively expanded this one back in January 2007, complete with a peer review that mentioned bringing it up to Featured status. Are you still planning on this course of action once USS Illinois (BB-65) and USS Kentucky (BB-66) are both Featured Articles?-MBK004 16:43, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

How would you feel about (either you or me) nominating the article for GA status as it stands now? In my view this article currently deserves more recognition than what it currently gets at B-class, yet as you mentioned could use some contextual support via other articles before A-class and FA.-MBK004 21:22, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll nominate the article tomorrow (about 13 hours from now) since I'm going to bed now and I have school in the morning.-MBK004 07:24, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

I'm starting on the nomination right now. You can add you co-nom by signing after me on the nominees page and also adding a blurb on the talk page around mine.--- MBK004 (talk) 18:06, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

GA nomination On Hold until suggestions from Talk:USS Texas (BB-35) are implemented. -MBK₀₀₄ 04:38, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I didn't see the tag. I've got only one more thing planned, and then you can handle a few since I'm going to bed. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:50, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

I've finished what I was going to do this evening. Have fun! -MBK₀₀₄ 05:54, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Well, our efforts have paid-off. Apparently, around 11:00 PM (CST) on 2 December 2007, USS Texas (BB-35) was promoted to Good Article Status! -MBK₀₀₄ 16:16, 3 December 2007 (UTC)

Wiki Spell Checker

(→Bangladesh relief effort - damn my poor spelling...) - I have the same problem! Here's some advice I got:

a javascript spell checker is available on Wikipedia, refer to the Help to find out more or contact me if you don't find. Martial BACQUET 15:29, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

I'm not aware of a Wikipedia spell checker. I use the spell checker built into my Mozilla browser. Further information can be found here: Wikipedia:Tools/Editing_tools#Spell_Checkers. SilkTork *SilkyTalk 09:02, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I find wikEd running in Firefox very elegant with wiki syntax highlighting, spell checking and preview features. jmcw 09:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Cheers, Pdfpdf (talk) 11:04, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

HullNumber.com

Hi Tom. There is a discussion of HullNumber.com specific ship page reciprocal links with the same specific ship page at Wikipedia, located at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Ships/Archive09#Hullnumber.com . Hullnumber.com is a non-commercial service to my fellow Navy veterans. Nothing for sale, no advertising. There are links to commercial sites posted on the Wikipedia ship pages. I do not redact them. I post links from my job during slow periods and label them clearly. I act within the bounds of the Hullnumber.com Wiki Project Ships discussion listed above. Please feel free to post on my talk page. I commend you for your contributions to the sea-faring communities. Best - dave s —Preceding unsigned comment added by Usnht (talk • contribs) 20:03, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tom

How you doing? Since I know that you love military articles and you know that I love writing them, I was wondering if you would take a look at an article which I wrote sometime ago and have been doing some minor work on. The article in question is 2/9, my old unit (who better then myself to write about it, right?). Anyway, I would like to know your valued opinion on the article. Take care, Tony the Marine (talk) 05:26, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you for looking over the article and for your fixes. I'm glad that you enjoyed it. Take care, buddy. Tony the Marine (talk) 08:00, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Chevrons

Thanks for that.. There's still a long way to go though.... Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:55, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

Hello

As you are my favorite english editor (i translate USS Wisconsin (BB-64) to medal on polish wiki and some others yours Iowa`s are medals on pl.wiki) i wana give you something. It is a list of bad disambigs :). I translate (before and after) 104 articles on pl.wiki to hit 444444 article and i was found some realy bad text on en.wiki. I dont know exactly where on Wikiproject:Military can i add that list so i put this here and you can insert on better place (or repair that texts :) )

USS Implicit,USS Joseph Hewes,USS Inflict,USS Jupiter,USS Justin,USS Rail,USS Rappahannock,USS Raven,USS Raymond,USS Redhead,USS Redwing,USS Reedbird,USS Regulus,USS Reybold,USS Rhea,USS Riverside,USS Roamer,USS Robert E. Peary,USS Robin,USS Rocket,USS Ruff,USS Rigel,USS Peacock,USS Pelican,USS Perseus,USS Parrakeet,USS Phoebe,USS Picket,USS Partridge,USS Pinnacle

Pmgpmg (talk) 22:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC) PS. Answer on my talk page. I dont check watchlist on en.wiki.

RfA thanks

Just wanted to say thanks for supporting me! Please find your thank you card here, should you wish to see it. I'm honored to have received your support. All the best, ~Eliz81^(C) 23:06, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Dutch masters

Dutch Masters is a famous brand, and was not written as spam. Tho the information is minimal, it meets WP:STUB. Anyone but the author, admin or not, can remove a speedy. i see the article has been subsequently expanded. I added 2 RSs myself just now. DGG (talk) 08:55, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

	<font=3> Thanks for your comments and support - Presque Isle State Park made featured article today! Take care, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:23, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

Truong Dinh

Hi there Tom. I reffed it with four different textbooks for good measure. If there's any other query, simply {{cn}} it and I will re-cite the info by moving the ref up from the bottom. Thanks, Blnguyen (bananabucket) 07:01, 28 November 2007 (UTC)

A belated Thank You!

		The Special Barnstar
		I hereby award you this Special Barnstar in recognition of taking care of the issues that popped up here when I was unable to. Thanks again, -MBK004 02:53, 1 December 2007 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXI (November 2007)

The November 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot 02:53, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

My friend

Tom my friend,

Thank you for the message. If there is one historian that I expect a lot from, it is you. I know that you have a brillant future. In regard to the image, if you really think that it has a chance of making featured picture, please be my guest and nominate it. I'm not very good when it comes to the nomination thing but, I would bemore then honored if you my friend did it. The recognition thing caught me by surprise, I thought that I was only going have dinner with McClintock and discuss some issues with him, when "Bam" all this happened, That is why I went alone without my family. Life is full of surprises, don't you agree? Tony the Marine 20:18, 2 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/Cut away of a 16in Gun Turret

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Iowa 16 inch Gun-EN.svg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. Chris.B | talk 15:49, 6 December 2007 (UTC)

Wall of Honor

You are among the best Wikipedians with whom I have had the pleasure of inter-acting with, Therefore I have inducted you into my "Wall Of Honor". Please accept this is plaque on my behalf. Tony the Marine (talk) 03:23, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

Wall of Honor
TomStar81

Award

In recognition of your diligent contributions towards the various reviews of military history articles, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Kirill 16:56, 8 December 2007 (UTC)

USS Wisconsin (BB-64)

You may be interested to learn that the battleship USS Wisconsin was adopted by the Wisconsin WikiProject; it has recieved a spot on our Wisconsin Portal (Portal:Wisconsin/Selected article). Thought you might like to know. 129.108.96.130 (talk) 17:46, 11 December 2007 (UTC)

USS Illinois

Well, I was in the middle of writing a review for it and I guess it's been up there too long and they decided not to promote it just yet. Here's what I was going to write:

• Oppose

First let me start off by saying excellent additions!!!This is more in line with an FA-quality article. It still isn't there, but you've clearly done your homework...speaking of doing your homework, I assume your exams are over? Enough chit-chat, let's get to the meat of the article (I'm not going to hit everything, but I will try to give at least one example of each...realize that you need to check the entire article for these problems).

1. Excessive wordiness/passive voice/improper number conversions (mind you these are the opening sentences in the body): "The passage of the Second Vison Act in 1939 had cleared the way for construction of the four South Dakota-class fast battleships and the first two Iowa class battleships (those with the hull numbers BB-61 and BB-62).[1] The latter four battleships of the class, those designated with the (hull numbers BB-63, BB-64, BB-65, and BB-66) were not cleared for construction until 1940,.[1] and at the time the two battleships with h Hull numbers BB-65 and BB-66 were intended to be originally slated as the first ships of the Montana-class, a larger, slower, upgunned class of battleship with an improved armor belt intended to protect her from her own compliment of twelve 16"/50 caliber 16-inch (40cm)/50 caliber Mark 7 guns." How did the Second Vison Act "clear" anything? What was the Second Vison Act? Was something else stopping it? These kinds of problems can and should be avoided.
2. "...a leviathan the likes of which the United States had never before constructed...." serious use of peacock terminology/poor encyclopedic terms
3. Switching between terms: BB-65, battleship #65, hull number 65, etc. Stick to one term throughout for clarity. Don't abbreviate using "#"
4. Too many subsections in the Armament section. It appears choppy.
5. References need some work. You need to include all pertinent information: author, publisher, title, date of publication, date of access (for websites only, not books), page numbers, etc. These all need to be within Wikipedia standards (proper italics, wikified dates for ALL citations, etc).
6. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 61cl, use 61 cl, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 61 cl.^[?]
7. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 700 lb.
8. Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
9. Get rid of weasel words in this article IAW WP:AWT. "arguably" should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.

In short, it isn't ready yet. I have no intention of nitpicking and showing every possible problem. Please read User:BQZip01/FA Tips for more information.

I hope that helps in fixing up the article! — BQZip01 — ^talk 17:45, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Keep up the good work!

Well, I guess it wasn't meant to be (keeping the FAC open for over a month). Excellent work on the additions, and you are OK on the ship class templates, but as for the conversion templates, I am still learning as are you. Hope finals went well, and hopefully we can get this article to FA by the new year or soon afterwards. I've decided that I will start working on expanding USS Alabama (BB-60) next along with some more expansion to USS Texas (BB-35) since I've acquired a few books recently on these particular ships. -MBK₀₀₄ 19:33, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Hi Tom and MBK; I hope you saw my note on Raul's talk page. I closed the FAC after waiting ten days because I thought you weren't able to attend to it, and while I had the requisite eight tabs open to promote/archive, I missed the comment you had just entered on the FAC. I'm not sure how Raul does it yet, but it takes me a long time to get all the pieces in the right place, so your final post to the FAC and my archiving were ships passing in the night. You can reinitiate the FAC any time you're ready, and I regretted having to close it. In the future, remember to keep the FAC posted, as I did wait ten days between comments before closing. Kind regards, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:10, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the note, Tom; you don't have to wait to hear from Raul. I closed it as his delegate, so I'm also able to give you the green light to start a new FAC whenever you want (not sure if you knew that Raul appointed me as a "deputy"?). Since it's already "Gimmebotified", you just need to re-submit a new FAC, with a note saying that I gave you the green light, that you don't have to wait the normal time. I'm sorry our ships passed in the night; I really didn't see that last message with all the tabs open and moving files around it takes to promote/archive FACs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:37, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm just sorry for my first "posts crossing in the night" had to happen with such a nice editor (on the other hand, I should be thankful it wasn't with someone unpleasant, or my ears could be ringing about now :-) I'm still not sure how Raul avoids having that happen, with so many tabs open at once, moving FAC files around. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:01, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thank you so much for the kind note, Tom. I hope your semester went well !! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 22:32, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

I'm with you. Iowa class Featured Topic here we come! -MBK₀₀₄ 22:48, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks!

Thanks for your welcome message. Andreas Toth (talk) 23:06, 16 December 2007 (UTC)

Removal of part of media section on USS Texas (BB-35)

Don't know if you saw this: [1]. I'm inclined to keep this in the article, but I don't want to get into an edit war. Is this notable enough to remain or is the reason for its removal valid? -MBK₀₀₄ 21:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll just leave it the way it is. What is in there current is notable, but as you said, it is borderline notable and the MoS doesn't favor it. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:52, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

Somethings for you

		Military history service award
		For tagging and assessing 1000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Military history WikiProject Service Award. --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
		For your fine work on 2000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Tireless Contributor's barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Working Man's Barnstar
		For your excellent work on 3000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Working Man's barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

		The Barnstar of Diligence
		For your outstanding work on 4000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Barnstar of Diligence. --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

More to follow ... :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 15:26, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Favor please

Could you award me my Tagging barnstars please? I can't really give them to myself :) It's the Milhist-3stripe and tireless contributor barnstar: templates for quick cutting and pasting—no further action required—arehere. Many thanks, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 11:02, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

Seasons Greetings

	<font=3> Wishing you a "Feliz Navidad and a Happy new Year" Tony the Marine (talk)

Reevaluation

Thank you for showing me that the picture had been fixed. I was able to change my !vote in time. --Sharkface217 00:30, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates/IJM suicide

Your Featured picture candidate has been promoted Your nomination for featured picture status, Image:Japanesesuicide.jpg, gained a consensus of support, and has been promoted. If you would like to nominate another image, please do so at Wikipedia:Featured picture candidates. MER-C 04:14, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Gunner (C&CR).JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Gunner (C&CR).JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 07:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

T&A awards

		The Epic Barnstar
		For your remarkable work on 5000 articles in Tag & Assess 2007, by order of the coordinators I hereby present you with this Barnstar of Diligence. --ROGER DAVIES talk 23:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

		Military History WikiProject 2007
		By order of the Coordinators of the Military History WikiProject—for your outstanding work in Tag & Assess 2007—I award you this Silver Wiki. You are an example to us all. --ROGER DAVIES talk 23:52, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Many thanks, Tom. --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 00:04, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy New Year

Hello Tom, I hope you had a pleasant New Year's Day, and that 2008 brings further success, health and happiness! Thanks for all your work on MILHIST, as an editor and coordinator and making it such a pleasant area in which to work. No wonder it is so successful!~ Blnguyen (bananabucket) 08:12, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

File:010105 fireworks2.jpg

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Jean Havoc (FMA).JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Jean Havoc (FMA).JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 17:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:Heymans Breda (FMA).JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:Heymans Breda (FMA).JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Disputed fair use rationale for Image:General Hakuro (FMA).JPG

Thanks for uploading Image:General Hakuro (FMA).JPG. However, there is a concern that the rationale you have provided for using this image under "fair use" may be invalid. Please read the instructions at Wikipedia:Non-free content carefully, then go to the image description page and clarify why you think the image qualifies for fair use. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to ensure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If it is determined that the image does not qualify under fair use, it will be deleted within a couple of days according to our criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot (talk) 21:41, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

USS Illinois (BB-65) FAC

It's a well-written and researched article, and clearly a labour of love, but I just don't see how a story about a battleship that was never finished and didn't actually see any action or even float could ever be a featured article - basically IMHO it's just not notable enough, however well written! I write here about all kinds of things and people, but they all have one simple thing in common - they worked. There are so many ships that saw real action and deserve featured article status first, I just wouldn't want to read about one that was a non-starter unless I was a very serious naval historian - and I'm not ;-) Excalibur (talk) 16:15, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The pile-on opposes/comments about the notability keep coming: [2] and [3]. They are cleverly inserted into the article, so I don't know if you've seen them. -MBK₀₀₄ 03:13, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

MBK, please don't accuse me of making a 'pile-on' comment. When I went to the FAC page I assumed I was going to support because TomStar writes exceptional articles. However, I don't think there's enough material to make this one an FA. The Land (talk) 11:36, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

I apologize about that remark. My 'pile-on' and 'cleverly inserted' remarks apply to the second diff, not the first (which is your comments). I must have pulled the diff to yours as well because it was right before the second one. I have struck the diff here. -MBK₀₀₄ 18:31, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Montana class merge proposal

I think that you've been following this. If not, you might need to chime in again. -MBK₀₀₄ 21:45, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I have to agree with you. I think I might try to propose a compromise on the talk page. Let's see what happens. -MBK₀₀₄ 22:08, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXII (December 2007)

The December 2007 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Re:Happy Anniversary

Thankyou very much! When I first signed up I never thought I'd have achieved what I have achieved up to now. I've really enjoyed my time here, and I look forward to what is to come. Thankyou, and happy editing! Lradrama 10:55, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

Happy new year

I just wanted to say, no hard feelings, you are a really good wikipedian TomStar81 and I like your attitude and the way that you get around problem issues like spelling by sheer tenacity, good research and being nice to people here. If you ever need anyone to check your spelling in 2008, then count me in, and good luck mate! Excalibur (talk) 02:08, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

You have been on my case

I have not seen anything in the FAC talk page that has addressed my comments. Still waiting for that. — BQZip01 — ^talk 06:52, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

answer on my talk page — BQZip01 — ^talk 07:43, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Tom this comment indicates that you have too much emotional involvement at the moment. It's part of the reason I think you should withdraw the FAC, have a break from the pressure address the concerns at your leisure then re nominate. Gnangarra 13:39, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

FAC

When I shifted to support it was over three weeks a go since then 2k of additional text has been added and there still a number of outstanding issues raised by other editors. I dont have any more time to continue monitoring the articles progression under the circumstances I couldnt say that I still supported the article. IMHO the FAC should be closed and you should continue to work on the article without the pressure leaving it there isnt going to achieve the desired result in the short term. Gnangarra 07:40, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

women as ships

Dear Tom, thanks for your note on my page. It's not your FAC page, it's not your article, and I haven't yet made a "public service announcement" about sexist language. It's quite a good article, BTW. Tony (talk) 13:13, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

This FAC nom was getting rather testy, and a bystander asked me to take a more personal interest in cooling this situation down. Raul654 (talk) 21:22, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Triple crown

[[

It gives me great pleasure to award this triple crown to TomStar81 in recognition of substantial contributions to Wikipedia's naval coverage. Durova^Charge! 23:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

Your Majesty, as a former sailor I certainly appreciate your work. salutes Durova^Charge! 23:14, 7 January 2008 (UTC)