Loading AI tools
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 35 | ← | Archive 38 | Archive 39 | Archive 40 | Archive 41 | Archive 42 | → | Archive 45 |
Time is running out at our Rodent FAC and we have not attracted as much interest and comment as we would have liked. I see you are active at FAC and if you felt like reviewing/commenting on the article it would be most helpful. Its a fascinating topic (or so I think) ! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:44, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
A note to significant contributors to the Ford Island article: its been nominated for promotion to Good article status. The nomination is listed at Good article nominations - Geography. Thanks for your work to improve the article! NorthAmerica1000 12:17, 13 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dank. As you probably know, despite you and one other editor supporting my original FAC for The Fifth Element, the review was archived as, accordingly to the closer, a minimum of 3 people need to support a nomination. Now that two weeks has elapsed since the nomination was archived, I have renominated it. See Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Fifth Element/archive2. There have only been minor changes since you supported the original nomination. Here is the difference between the version you supported and the current version: . I'd be ever so grateful if you could support the nomination again; now that all of your and everybody else's concerns have already been addressed I anticipate this nomination to go much quicker and smoother. Have a nice day. Freikorp (talk) 07:21, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dan, this FAC has plenty of support and the requisite checks but a quick pass suggested it would benefit from a copyeditor such as yourself running through it before we consider promotion, if you can spare the time. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:55, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey Dank, are you available for providing feedback at the Sleeping Dogs FAC? Thanks for everything! URDNEXT (talk) 02:06, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dank. Thanks again for prose reviewing fluorine during its FAC. I wanted to know if could I ask you to copyedit another element article, astatine? Basically, I think this article is fine, I only need checks at technical things, such as prose quality and links, after which the FAC should start. It's not a great rush, if that's a thing, just let me know if you can help. Thanks--R8R (talk) 17:33, 20 September 2014 (UTC)
...that was me countering vandalism additions of fake storms, incorrect stat alterations, et cetera. I just thought I'd let you know. Dustin (talk) 14:12, 21 September 2014 (UTC)
Hey Dan. Do you mind taking a look at the proposed lede for SAS Inc? I'm doing a GA review and I think the proposed lede is an improvement but also introduces some other minor problems. My guess is a quick look should take between 10 and 15 minutes of your time. I'd love to have your input there. Thanks! Protonk (talk) 22:42, 22 September 2014 (UTC)
Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:06, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
I've noticed some of your recent edit summaries about using VE and being concerned about edit conflicts. You might be interested to know that per a conversation I just had at the VE feedback page, if you edit a page with VE there is no difference in edit conflicts than if you had edited it with wikitext -- even though the whole article is available to edit, Mediawiki is apparently smart enough to understand which sections you actually did edit. So if you used to edit an article section by section, and you do the same with VE, saving after each section, you'll get exactly the same chance of edit conflict as before. Of course, if you edit the whole article in VE in one go, then the chance of an ec is higher, but that's true with wikitext too. It's just that it's more tempting with VE because you can always see the rest of the article. Anyway, thought you might be interested. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:16, 26 September 2014 (UTC)
The Barnstar of Diligence | |
Sorry I didn't get a chance to finish addressing your comments for 2002 PTS's FAC, but thanks so much for your edits! It really helped push the article over the top :) ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 03:03, 26 September 2014 (UTC) |
Hi Dan, in recognition of your successful election as a co-ordinator of the Military History Project for the next year, please accept these co-ord stars. Thanks for standing and all the best for the coming year. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:54, 29 September 2014 (UTC)
Hi Dan, we've collaborated before on a couple of MILHIST FACs and I wondered if I could ask for your assistance with one I've got underway at the moment - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Carl Hans Lody/archive1. I'm hoping to have the article ready for the Main Page by November 6, the centenary of Lody's death - quite a tight deadline. I'd value your input on any issues that might exist with the article; would you be able to have a look at it? Prioryman (talk) 21:59, 30 September 2014 (UTC)
The WikiChevrons | ||
By order of the Military History WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, Good Article, A-Class and Featured Article reviews for the period July to September 2014, I am delighted to award you the WikiChevrons. During this period you undertook an amazing 45 reviews. Without reviewers like you it would be very difficult for our writers to achieve their goals of creating high quality content, so your efforts are greatly appreciated. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 13:47, 2 October 2014 (UTC) |
Hello and thanks for the copyedits on Megadeth. However, I hope you'll lend your talents on Master of Puppets, as I'm planning to take a shot at FA with that one. I know it's long way till we reach there, but some basic wording will be much appreciated. If you're short on time, I understand.--Retrohead (talk) 20:31, 7 October 2014 (UTC)
I added a heading around your prose support, so it didn't get lost in the reviews. Hope that's okay. auntieruth (talk) 17:29, 11 October 2014 (UTC)
I'm having a discussion with an editor over at User talk:Doremo#Hyphen vs en-dash on the proper punctuation for ship-class names like Conte di Cavour-class battleships when the first part is open. MOS says that usually these use an en-dash rather than a hyphen, but I've never seen that usage in any of my reference books. I'm wondering what the various style guides have to say about the issue and if ship names are some sort of exception. Your thoughts on the topic would be welcome.--Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:30, 24 October 2014 (UTC)
Hello Dank:
Thanks for all of your contributions to improve Wikipedia, and have a happy and enjoyable Halloween!
– NorthAmerica1000 14:40, 27 October 2014 (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.