User talk:Dank/Archive 60

October to December 2017 Milhist article reviewing

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of 16 Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period October to December 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:09, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks AR. - Dank (push to talk) 02:54, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

FAC reviewing barnstar

		The Reviewer Barnstar
		FAC can't function without people like you contributing reviews. Thank you for the eight FAC reviews you did during December. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:24, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Mike. - Dank (push to talk) 14:25, 7 January 2018 (UTC)

Der 100. Psalm

Thank you for your help with the TFA! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 12:27, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Sure Gerda, any time. - Dank (push to talk) 14:11, 9 January 2018 (UTC)

Chaffee

"Not TFA."

– Sorry for the mistake, but it would have been nice if you'd moved it to POTD instead of deleting it. Sca (talk) 17:15, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

I looked around the Main Page and missed it, sorry. - Dank (push to talk) 17:18, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

That happens. TNX. Sca (talk) 17:22, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

LCJ

Hi Dan, Just a quick note about this. I don't think we used the term "Chief Justice" in UK courts, but we do use the name "Lord Chief Justice", which was Cockburn's title. It's a moot point, as it'll be off the MP in less than 60 seconds It's already off the MP, but it's just an FYI... Cheers - SchroCat (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

Hey Gavin. Good to know. It was way out of my comfort zone, but I felt like my hands were tied because the TFA blurb was clearly wrong, but I couldn't make stuff up, so I had to run with the article text, such as it was. - Dank (push to talk) 01:01, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

How to book a featured article date?

Re: your undo, my sincere apologies; I thought I was following the instructions. The article has already passed GA, has plenty of active editors and we have almost 10 months, so turning it into a FA doesn't seem remotely difficult. That seemed worth a "pending request" for the date. (It's hardly irrevocable; if the article isn't ready with months to spare, or another request for the date turns up from a more promising candidate, void the request.)

If that wasn't the way to do it, what is? Surely this has happened before, with other anniversaries? People see an anniversary coming up and want to try for a FA? What is the mechanism to reserve a date while an article works toward FAR?

The one peculiar thing about this request is that the current article requires a title change, but that's hardly a huge hurdle. (FYI, the Nov. 16 vote in the CGPM is almost as certain as the 2019 election in North Korea. Current WP articles say "expected" to be polite, but there's no realistic doubt.) 23.83.37.241 (talk) 02:57, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

When you hit the edit button at WP:TFAP, the page we're talking about, you get this:

That's our position, and has been for as long as I can remember. If you'd like help or pointers on the FAC process, a note at WT:FAC would probably be best. - Dank (push to talk) 03:16, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Nodar Kumaritashvili at FAC

Hey, just a message that I've brought the Nodar Kumaritashvili article back to FAC: here. As you commented last time I was wondering if you'd like to take another look. Thanks. Kaiser matias (talk) 08:58, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. - Dank (push to talk) 14:49, 28 January 2018 (UTC)

28 Feb TFA scheduled

I went ahead and pulled out one from your prepared blurbs - Flight Unlimited III ... Ealdgyth - Talk 16:20, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks much! Gratz on another successful month of scheduling. - Dank (push to talk) 16:35, 31 January 2018 (UTC)

Notification

Hello, you mentioned me on a talk page but I'm afraid having had a look I don't understand why? Sorry. Angmering (talk) 20:46, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

Sure. In one of your TFA blurbs from 2016, I changed "become involved in the investigation" to "join the investigation". Did you have any objections at the time, or do you now? What I'm trying to do is get a quick consensus on some words that some FAC copyeditors consider too vague, at least in the given context (and even a little disreputable, in ways that might take a while to explain). - Dank (push to talk) 20:54, 8 February 2018 (UTC)

I'm afraid I haven't been able to work out to which article you're referring, sorry. Angmering (talk) 00:02, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry. Diff. - Dank (push to talk) 00:07, 16 February 2018 (UTC)

While you're here, I've got one more for you, from the same diff: "It was the third and last of the ... [serials]. Like its predecessors, [it] was written by" -> "... serials, all written by". - Dank (push to talk) 00:14, 16 February 2018 (UTC)