User talk:Hog Farm/Archive 1

Hog Farm, you are invited to the Teahouse!

Hi Hog Farm! Thanks for contributing to Wikipedia. Be our guest at the Teahouse! The Teahouse is a friendly space where new editors can ask questions about contributing to Wikipedia and get help from experienced editors like Nick Moyes (talk). Visit the Teahouse We hope to see you there! Delivered by HostBot on behalf of the Teahouse hosts 16:04, 6 November 2019 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: List of Plants Classified as Noxious Weeds in the United States (November 13)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by AngusWOOF was:  The comment the reviewer left was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:List of Plants Classified as Noxious Weeds in the United States and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:List of Plants Classified as Noxious Weeds in the United States, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{db-self}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

AngusWOOF (bark • sniff) 21:00, 13 November 2019 (UTC)

Bengals history page

Hi Hog Farm,

I'm really impressed with the work you did on the article History of the Cincinnati Bengals, and that you weren't afraid to shorten the article by removing the vast amount of trivial details even though you're a newer editor. I was meaning to start trimming it myself for quite some time. Keep up the good work!

--WuTang94 (talk) 23:39, 14 November 2019 (UTC)

Joe Beef Page

Hi Hog Farm--I'm a Professor, and my students are currently working on the Joe Beef (restaurant) page--can you chill for an hour or so before removing any of their edits?

Hey Hog Farm

You just edited Joe Beef (restaurant) and said I didn't cite it but I did it.

Request for deletion

Please have that article deleted. Not sure how to accomplish this task. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Wisegrandaugher (talk • contribs) 02:44, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

@Wisegrandaugher: I can't delete the page. The page is being discussed for deletion at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Finkenberg's Sons Furniture. Feel free to explain your desire for page deletion there. Hog Farm (talk) 02:48, 4 January 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/@HopeMob

Hello! You may be interested in seeing my comment in the AfD since you posted there. Regards, Jovanmilic97 (talk) 18:53, 22 November 2019 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for December 1

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited List of Middle-earth characters, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages Rohan and Moria (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar titles. (Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.)

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:24, 1 December 2019 (UTC)

Boldog

Hey, I reverted your conversion of Boldog into a disambiguation page since as far as I can see there was no discussion or consensus about essentially deleting the current article and replacing it with a disambiguation. Drastic action like that should only be taken after discussion with other editors. If there was a discussion somewhere and I simply missed it then that's my mistake, I would recommend indicating in the edit summary where that occurred (for example you could say something like "converted to a disambiguation per Articles for Deletion consensus.") MDDevice ^talk 04:02, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

User:MDDevice - Thanks for pointing out my error. I got overeager, the thing's at AfD now. Hog Farm (talk) 04:18, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

No worries, the bureaucracy around this stuff is pretty difficult to get a handle on so it's easy to slip up a little - and fwiw I fully agree with you that the article doesn't belong here. Keep it up! MDDevice ^talk 05:10, 2 December 2019 (UTC)

Pending changes reviewer granted

Hello. Your account has been granted the "pending changes reviewer" userright, allowing you to review other users' edits on pages protected by pending changes. The list of articles awaiting review is located at Special:PendingChanges, while the list of articles that have pending changes protection turned on is located at Special:StablePages.

Being granted reviewer rights neither grants you status nor changes how you can edit articles. If you do not want this user right, you may ask any administrator to remove it for you at any time.

See also:

• Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, the guideline on reviewing
• Wikipedia:Pending changes, the summary of the use of pending changes
• Wikipedia:Protection policy#Pending changes protection, the policy determining which pages can be given pending changes protection by administrators.
  

Mz7 (talk) 01:48, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2409:4052:2e98:2517:1465:639c:aa40:fa31

Hey, I've just G6ed Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/2409:4052:2e98:2517:1465:639c:aa40:fa31 to tidy up. Neither IP is a sock of the other, this is just an annoying mobile ISP being an annoying mobile ISP and moving customers to all different IPs purely to annoy us. With the article semi-protected, there's nothing further to do. ST47 (talk) 05:49, 11 December 2019 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:John Nicolson#2015 General Elections and Page Protection

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:John Nicolson#2015 General Elections and Page Protection. I invite you to take part in the discussion as there is a dispute over consensus over if the information about the edit at [1] should remain. Optakeover^(U)(T)(C) 12:49, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

December 2019

Hello, I'm Muboshgu. Your recent edit to the page Austin Romine appears to have added premature information about a reported sports transaction, so it has been removed for now. The transaction is based on anonymous sources and/or awaiting an official announcement. If you believe the transaction has been completed, please cite a reliable source or discuss your change on the article's talk page. If you think I made a mistake, or if you have any questions, you can leave me a message on my talk page. Thank you. – Muboshgu (talk) 21:19, 12 December 2019 (UTC)

You made a mistake allowing Globe Elections United Network

That's been being spammed for ages. You coulda read the edit summary of the edit it was undoing. 86.173.65.225 (talk) 07:18, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

@User:86.173.65.225 Yeah that's my mistake on that. Sorry. Hog Farm (talk) 13:47, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

No worries, keep up the good work. 86.173.65.225 (talk) 23:39, 13 December 2019 (UTC)

Aaron Judge

Hi, I noticed that you accepted a pending edit on Aaron Judge while I was looking for a source to add to it. When you review pending edits, be sure to add a source if the edit didn't or else don't accept the edit, especially on biographies. Thanks, and happy editing! Schazjmd (talk) 01:16, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: I did research to verify that Judge did win this award, but I had a mental lapse and didn't add the source. I'll be more careful in the future. Hog Farm (talk) 01:20, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Hog Farm, thanks! I only recently discovered that I can edit on top of the pending edit and at the bottom where there are the options to select "This is a minor edit" and "Watch this page", reviewers also can select "Accept this version (includes pending change)" so that we can both accept a pending edit and fix it ourselves at the same time. Schazjmd (talk) 01:25, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Schazjmd: That's a great tip! I did not know that either. Hog Farm - I came here because I think your user name is great and found this post. :) S0091 (talk) 22:16, 1 January 2020 (UTC)

David Parker

Hi Hog Farm, I reverted your edit to David Parker because the song title doesn't need to be disambiguated from other David Parkers. As per WP:PARTIAL, don't add a link just because its title is a longer form of the DAB title. Thanks, Leschnei (talk) 02:03, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

@Leschnei: Thanks for clarifying that with me. I can see where my edit was in error now. Hog Farm (talk) 02:16, 24 December 2019 (UTC)

Photo of T-shirt

The picture is no big deal, deleted or not. Merry Christmas!!! Pete unseth (talk) 02:38, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

Good luck

豊かな十年へようこそ/WELCOME TO THE D20s

Miraclepine wishes you a Merry Christmas, a Happy New Year, and a prosperous decade of change and fortune.
このミラPはHog Farmたちのメリークリスマスも新年も変革と幸運の豊かな十年をおめでとうございます！
フレフレ、みんなの未来！/GOOD LUCK WITH YOUR FUTURE!
ミラP 02:48, 25 December 2019 (UTC)

A brownie for you!

Thanks for your work keeping an eye on the Ajit Pai article RandomAct(talk to me) 02:41, 2 January 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to the 2020 WikiCup!

Happy New Year, Happy New Decade and Happy New WikiCup! The competition has begun and all article creators, expanders and improvers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. We are relaxing the rule that only content on which you have completed significant work during 2020 will count; now to be eligible for points in the competition, you must have completed significant work on the content at some time! Any questions on the rules or on anything else connected to the Cup should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will move on to round 2. Good luck! The judges for the WikiCup are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Godot13 (talk · contribs · email), Vanamonde93 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk) 07:22, 3 January 2020 (UTC)

Rollback granted

Hi Hog Farm. After reviewing your request for "rollbacker", I have enabled rollback on your account. Keep in mind these things when going to use rollback:

• Getting rollback is no more momentous than installing Twinkle.
• Rollback should be used to revert clear cases of vandalism only, and not good faith edits.
• Rollback should never be used to edit war.
• If abused, rollback rights can be revoked.
• Use common sense.

If you no longer want rollback, contact me and I'll remove it. Also, for some more information on how to use rollback, see Wikipedia:Administrators' guide/Rollback (even though you're not an admin). I'm sure you'll do great with rollback, but feel free to leave me a message on my talk page if you run into troubles or have any questions about appropriate/inappropriate use of rollback. Thank you for helping to reduce vandalism. Happy editing! ~ ToBeFree (talk) 03:13, 5 January 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Danny Duffy

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Danny Duffy you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lee Vilenski -- Lee Vilenski (talk) 10:01, 9 January 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Anti-Vandalism Barnstar
	You are great at fighting vandalism! Keep up the great work! LPS and MLP Fan (Littlest Pet Shop) (My Little Pony) 22:10, 12 January 2020 (UTC)

Price Hill Cincinnati history page adding BLOC Ministries to content

Why was this content removed? It is important history to the last 22 years of price hills growth and prosperity. You allow Price Hill Will and other nonprofits to be know here but why did you remove this critical historical and present factual information? Wallen2020 (talk) 01:27, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

@Wallen2020: You need to find citations to prove your statements. If you don't add reliable sources to additions of content, we can't verify that the content is factual. I'll trust you that your additions were true, but we have to have a source to back up what we add to the Wikipedia, because some people like to make stuff up and put it in there. Find sources for your material, and please read the page about reliable sources I linked to earlier in the article. Thanks for editing, Hog Farm (talk) 01:31, 13 January 2020 (UTC)

Justin Moore discography

Source for one of your missing video directors here............ -- ChrisTheDude (talk) 21:48, 15 January 2020 (UTC)

• @ChrisTheDude: Thanks. I tried searching the Wayback machine for the two I couldn't find on the regular browser, but my search terming on the Wayback needs some improvement (it uses keywords a bit differently than how I have my web browser set up to work) and I came up with a bunch of unhelpful results on there. I don't have the greatest technical skills in the world. Hog Farm (talk) 03:50, 16 January 2020 (UTC)

Théoden

I have tried to rewrite the article on Theoden to align with this statement

"Works of fiction are generally considered to "come alive" for their audience. They therefore exist in a kind of perpetual present, regardless of when the fictional action is supposed to take place relative to the reader's "now". Thus, generally you should write about fiction using the historical present tense, not the past tense. (See WP:Manual of Style § Verb tense and WP:Manual of Style/Writing about fiction § Contextual presentation.) Examples:

Homer presents, Achilles rages, Andromache laments, Priam pleads. "Holden Caulfield has a certain disdain for what he sees as 'phony'." "Friends is an American sitcom that was aired on NBC."

However I am facing being reverted and thwarted by two heavy handed undying supports of Tolkien cruft who will not let the text be changed in any way. This is frustrating, and the exact process that gives us the worst possible LotR related articles.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:23, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

• If you could have a look at the Gondor article and talk pages it might help. I have tried to improve it a little. I am still astonded that there are only 8 non-primary sources, and I am not even sure all 8 of those are no-primary. The article has gone crazy in endless detail and now there are attempts to stop any editing or reformating or cutting back the unending absurdity and length of the article.John Pack Lambert (talk) 20:54, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
  • @Johnpacklambert: I personally agree with you on the tense for the fiction; the issue stems from WikiProject Middle-earth deciding that Tolkien's writings should be made an exception to that rule, so I don't know how far we'll be able to get on that point. I'll see what I can get done on that Gondor article. Hog Farm (talk) 21:15, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
    • Why exactly would a Wikiproject be able to decide to exempt itself from such a rule. Especially one that has left hundreds of article in-universe for over 8 years of notice and has given us unsourced articles that have lasted for 16 years.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:18, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
      • I have absolutely no idea. The statement is here. If I had to guess, it's because half of Wikipedia appears to have been a Tolkien fan club in 2004. The fact that some of those Tolkien articles that have been deleted are older than articles on actual former countries is sad. Interestingly, I found out by visiting the Wikiproject Middle-earth page that in 2005 and 2006, there was both the Middle-earth wikiproject and a separate one for the Silmarillion (which is probably why there were so many Silmarillion character articles). Hog Farm (talk) 21:25, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
      • Apparently it also dictates that editors are required to use British English in Tolkien articles. They seem kinda restrictive over there. Hog Farm (talk) 21:27, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
• Now an editor is going after edits by me that stood for over a week, I think almost two weeks. This editing of several articles on Lord of the Rings chraracters was something I poured hours into one Sunday and some time into since then. For people to go through and straight up revert every edit I made is so annoying. Reverting in this manner is the key to why Wikipedia does not at times feel like a collaborative project, but a system where people maintain dominance. I have a sinking feeling that they are also going to seek to go through and reimpose the abusurd number of statements of the specific year in LotR articles. This whole thing is way too much.John Pack Lambert (talk) 21:59, 24 January 2020 (UTC)
• As a Tolkien fan, I like the theoretical idea of having a Wikiproject Middle-earth. However, I'm getting rather annoyed by some of the mandates, especially the ones about tense. Honestly, I can see this winding up as a request for comment eventually. I don't see any reason why one (albeit rather large) fictional universe should override the Wikipedia policies for writing about fiction. Hog Farm (talk) 22:06, 24 January 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for February 7

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Batted ball, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Foul line (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 13:43, 7 February 2020 (UTC)

Alfriston Market Cross - Review

Thanks for reviewing Alfriston Market Cross. I've made the alterations you suggested. Topo122 (talk) 17:37, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for listing Alfriston Market Cross as a 'Good Article' so prompltly - much appreciated. Topo122 (talk) 20:49, 9 February 2020 (UTC)

Courtesy notice of passing mention at ANI

There is currently a discussion at Wikipedia:Administrators' noticeboard/Incidents regarding an issue with which you may have been involved. Doug Mehus T·C 16:39, 10 February 2020 (UTC)

FYI

 – Note: you are not the subject of this notice, but rather, you have been mentioned in a passing/tangential way in the notice regarding Not Rosguill

Ahmed Khalef

Thank you for leaving me a note on Ahmed Khalef. I put references for his coaching career.

Talkback

Hello, Hog Farm. You have new messages at Talk:Castleton_Square/GA1.
Message added 22:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Ten Pound Hammer • ^{(What did I screw up now?)} 22:12, 14 February 2020 (UTC)

Charles E. Apgar

Thanks for accepting the review of Charles E. Apgar. I'll address the concerns between now and Monday. --mikeu ^talk 00:53, 15 February 2020 (UTC)

Do you ever close RfDs?

Hi Hoggie,

(Apologies if you don't like my nickname for you, but I think it all the time when I see your name. ;-))

Anyway, do you ever close RfDs? One discussion is ripe for closure by a non-admin, if you want to take it. ;-)

Cheers,
Doug Mehus T·C 18:22, 20 February 2020 (UTC)

Hog Farm, thanks for closing the RfD discussion. In your closing comments, you said, "The result of the discussion was disambiguate[,]" probably not realizing that that wording is included in the result parameter. Thus, just a head's up if you want to amend your own close and remove duplicative text. Doug Mehus T·C 17:28, 21 February 2020 (UTC)

Stop messaging me.

Retired and not interested, thank you. Uthanc (talk) 14:04, 23 February 2020 (UTC)
- It's an automatic feature of Twinkle, if a situation comes up I guess I'll just do whatever manually. Hog Farm (talk) 18:59, 23 February 2020 (UTC)

Comment You can still use Twinkle to list deletion discussions, and just do as I do and check the creating user's talk page for any retirement notices or requests not to be templated. If you see such requests, then just uncheck the "notify page creator" box in Twinkle. It's, technically, not a requirement; only encouraged. (talk page stalker) Doug Mehus T·C 23:04, 25 February 2020 (UTC)

The WikiCup

As a WikiCup judge, I have removed your submission of the Smaug GAR from your submissions page at the WikiCup, because Round1 finished on 26 February. It will be eligible for Round2 when it opens on the 1st March, and will get you off to a flying start! Cwmhiraeth (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 March newsletter

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
• Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
• Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
• Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
• CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
• The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included L293D, Kingsif, Enwebb, Lee Vilenski and CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews.

If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup newsletter correction

There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:30, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Wilson's Creek

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Wilson's Creek you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:00, 3 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Wilson's Creek

The article Battle of Wilson's Creek you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Wilson's Creek for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 14:00, 5 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Wilson's Creek

The article Battle of Wilson's Creek you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Wilson's Creek for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:22, 6 March 2020 (UTC)

Active date for 5th New York Cavalry

Hello @Hog Farm: In the GA review of 5th New York Cavalry, you expressed some concern about the active date for the regiment in the InfoBox. I have checked a few of the Civil War Featured Articles, and found no consistency. The 68th New York Volunteer Infantry Regiment says July 22, 1861—yet the National Park Service does not mention that date. The 21st Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry uses the date the regiment departed the state: "The regiment, originally numbering slightly more than 1,000 men, departed Worcester on August 23, 1861." This date matches the date used by the National Park Service as when the regiment left camp for Baltimore. I left a note for discussion of this in the Military history Discussion tab, but received no response yet. Currently, I have changed the 5th NY active date to November 18 because that is when the regiment left NY for Baltimore. Company A was mustered in on August 15, 1861, and the regiment got its final name on November 15, 1861. I do not have any problems using any of those dates. Your preference? TwoScars (talk) 22:34, 7 March 2020 (UTC)

TwoScars - My instinct would be to go with the muster date. However, my area of expertise in this conflict is in the Western Theater, where units were frequently stat units until their muster date into the Federal/Confederate service. For instance, at the Battle of Wilson's Creek, two of the three Confederate divisions present were actually state troops - the Missouri State Guard under Sterling Price, and some Arkansas militia under N. Bart Pearce. So I guess, just go with whatever the NPS says here. Hog Farm (talk) 00:03, 8 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Batted ball

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Batted ball you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 16:00, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of your diligence in following me around and pointing out my mistakes. Truly a full time job. Please keep it up Gog the Mild (talk) 16:14, 11 March 2020 (UTC)

Your submission at Articles for creation: Saver's Credit (March 12)

Your recent article submission to Articles for Creation has been reviewed! Unfortunately, it has not been accepted at this time. The reason left by KartikeyaS343 was: Please check the submission for any additional comments left by the reviewer. You are encouraged to edit the submission to address the issues raised and resubmit when they have been resolved.

• If you would like to continue working on the submission, go to Draft:Saver's Credit and click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window.
• If you now believe the draft cannot meet Wikipedia's standards or do not wish to progress it further, you may request deletion. Please go to Draft:Saver's Credit, click on the "Edit" tab at the top of the window, add "{{Db-g7}}" at the top of the draft text and click the blue "publish changes" button to save this edit.
• If you do not make any further changes to your draft, in 6 months, it will be considered abandoned and may be deleted.
• If you need any assistance, you can ask for help at the Articles for creation help desk, on the reviewer's talk page or use Wikipedia's real-time chat help from experienced editors.

KartikeyaS (talk) 20:07, 12 March 2020 (UTC)

User talk:Dt012n68.san.rr.com

Hi, I removed the content on User talk:Dt012n68.san.rr.com because the users only edit was 19 years ago, it was not adding the redirect, and the user has been indef blocked for 10 years. OcelotCreeper (talk) 14:52, 15 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Cane Hill

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Cane Hill you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 13:41, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Cane Hill

The article Battle of Cane Hill you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Cane Hill for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Chiswick Chap -- Chiswick Chap (talk) 20:22, 22 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of J. Johnston Pettigrew

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article J. Johnston Pettigrew you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 20:20, 24 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of J. Johnston Pettigrew

The article J. Johnston Pettigrew you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:J. Johnston Pettigrew for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 00:03, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wilson's Creek National Battlefield

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wilson's Creek National Battlefield you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 16:21, 25 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wilson's Creek National Battlefield

The article Wilson's Creek National Battlefield you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wilson's Creek National Battlefield for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 11:21, 26 March 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of J. Johnston Pettigrew

Hello! Your submission of J. Johnston Pettigrew at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) underneath your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Narutolovehinata5 ^tccsdnew 07:05, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for March 28

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited First Battle of Newtonia, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Native Americans (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 09:55, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Wackerman

Why do you want to delete my article? I already changed the text. George Bathead (talk) 21:49, 28 March 2020 (UTC)

George Bathead - Wikipedia has certain standards for what gets article subjects. One of them is WP:GNG. For the Wackerman article, WP:MUSICBIO also applies. Because Mr. Wackerman doesn't seem to meet either standard, I listed the article for deletion. The discussion is at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/John Wackerman, and please participate in the discussion there. Hog Farm (talk) 00:01, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Blackburn's Ford

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Blackburn's Ford you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 04:00, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Blackburn's Ford

The article Battle of Blackburn's Ford you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Blackburn's Ford for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 05:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dayton Moore

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Dayton Moore you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 13:41, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dayton Moore

The article Dayton Moore you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Dayton Moore for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 14:20, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Dayton Moore

The article Dayton Moore you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Dayton Moore for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of MWright96 -- MWright96 (talk) 20:02, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Dry Wood Creek

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Dry Wood Creek you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 22:40, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Blackburn's Ford

The article Battle of Blackburn's Ford you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Blackburn's Ford for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:02, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Dry Wood Creek

The article Battle of Dry Wood Creek you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Dry Wood Creek for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 19:20, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Dry Wood Creek

The article Battle of Dry Wood Creek you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Dry Wood Creek for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Kingsif -- Kingsif (talk) 03:03, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Prairie Grove

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Prairie Grove you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 21:21, 1 April 2020 (UTC)

Frank Tanana

Thanks! Looking forward to your review, and I'll address any problems there are with the article. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 01:20, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

• Made latest rounds of changes. The Hostess image was already on Commons, so I figured I'd put it on the article since it existed. I'm assuming good faith as well. Fun fact-the way those cards were printed, you had to use scissors to get them off the package. I happen to own a couple. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 23:01, 3 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Prairie Grove

The article Battle of Prairie Grove you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Prairie Grove for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 12:22, 2 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA Nomination of Alex Gordon

Since you were kind enough to review the Tanana article, I started a review of your Alex Gordon article! I'll be a little busy this weekend, but if I don't get much more done this weekend, I'll definitely get back to it next week. It needs some work first, but I think it's on it's way to being a GA. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 00:00, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alex Gordon

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Alex Gordon you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sanfranciscogiants17 -- Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 00:01, 4 April 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for April 6

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Alex Gordon, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Billy Butler (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 08:19, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Alex Gordon

The article Alex Gordon you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Alex Gordon for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sanfranciscogiants17 -- Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 18:02, 6 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of First Battle of Newtonia

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article First Battle of Newtonia you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 01:20, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Poison Spring

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Poison Spring you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:00, 11 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Poison Spring

The article Battle of Poison Spring you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Poison Spring for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 01:40, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Poison Spring

The article Battle of Poison Spring you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Poison Spring for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 05:01, 12 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of First Battle of Newtonia

The article First Battle of Newtonia you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:First Battle of Newtonia for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 04:41, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Russell Branyan

I think I got everything you mentioned - let me know if there's anything more! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 15:32, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

Yep, it looks like you got everything. Promoting. Hog Farm (talk) 15:56, 13 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Batted ball

On 14 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Batted ball, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that baseball coach Mike Coolbaugh was killed by a batted ball in 2007? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Batted ball. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Batted ball), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

New

Are you merely a new page patroller? Momentum7 (talk) 18:07, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

• Not sure exactly what you mean, but I do go through the new pages feed. I'm not an official new page patroller though. Hog Farm (talk) 18:18, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

It was extraneous info on your page. I guess you could have removed it; I don't even know if you knew it was there. I saw you have an interest in editing Civil War articles. Momentum7 (talk) 18:21, 14 April 2020 (UTC)

• You did not answer.Momentum7 (talk) 10:24, 19 April 2020 (UTC)
  • I'd put the stuff on my page as a joke. I don't really care if it's there or not. Hog Farm (talk) 17:44, 19 April 2020 (UTC)

Nate Schierholtz

First round changes addressed; let me know if there are any more! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 13:06, 18 April 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion of article "Body non piercing jewellery"

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because there is no official resource found on Google, you can help me find another reliable source or editing it instead of deleting it. Btw, you can look at page Body piercing jewellery with no source but not deleted. AneHara (talk) 04:13, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

• The issue is that it seems to copy another source closely, which isn't allowed. See WP:COPYVIO, sources at least have to be paraphrased. A Wikipedia tool known as Earwig flagged the page as being 91% similar to another online source, which isn't allowed. Hog Farm (talk) 04:16, 22 April 2020 (UTC)

AfD

I'm not all that experienced with deletion discussions. Well, I should say that yes, I have participated, but not like folks that do it on a regular basis. But I have to say that the purpose is to discuss the issues that people see. In other words, converse. You probably shouldn't tell someone to be aware of that bludgeoning policy for doing that. Dawnseeker2000 02:28, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

• @Dawnseeker2000:- Yeah, that was probably too far on the comment. I should have approached it a little differently. I think one of the other !voters was trying to get at the same thing I was by asking if you were going to comment to every single !keep voter. I don't think you were intentionally trying to bludgeon the process, but when a single commentor responds to almost every single participant disagreeing with them, it can be viewed as bludgeoning. I should've done a little better WP:AGF there and not thrown the bludgeon comment onto the end of my reply. Hog Farm (talk) 15:47, 23 April 2020 (UTC)

Tex Earnhardt

https://www.earnhardtford.com/earnhardt-history.html

Bil Mesa, AZ EoGuy (talk) 05:33, 24 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Dayton Moore

On 25 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Dayton Moore, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Dayton Moore, general manager of the Kansas City Royals, held an anti-pornography seminar for the baseball team in 2018? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Dayton Moore. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Dayton Moore), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar

Hey! Thanks for the feedback. I'm still new at this and appreciate the opportunity to learn. I'm not sure where to comment on your proposal to delete the Esoterica (black metal band) page. I agree that it is somewhat esoteric. The band is connected with other bands with approved pages such as Krieg (band). So should I merge it with Krieg? What are your thoughts? Thanks, BigMac Bigmacthealmanac (talk) 16:30, 25 April 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Hog Farm, I really appreciate your help with getting TWO of my GA nominations up to good article status. Thanks! Newtack101 (talk) 01:20, 26 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of First Battle of Newtonia Historic District

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article First Battle of Newtonia Historic District you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 17:02, 27 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of First Battle of Newtonia Historic District

The article First Battle of Newtonia Historic District you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:First Battle of Newtonia Historic District for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 03:41, 28 April 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Cane Hill

On 29 April 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Cane Hill, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a number of Confederate soldiers at the Battle of Cane Hill were armed only with shotguns? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Cane Hill. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Cane Hill), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 29 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mathew H. Ritchey House

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Mathew H. Ritchey House you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 22:01, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mathew H. Ritchey House

The article Mathew H. Ritchey House you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Mathew H. Ritchey House for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 23:41, 30 April 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Mathew H. Ritchey House

The article Mathew H. Ritchey House you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Mathew H. Ritchey House for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of CaroleHenson -- CaroleHenson (talk) 02:41, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 May newsletter

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
• Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
• The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
• Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
• Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Hog Farm with 801, Kingsif with 719, SounderBruce with 710, Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of McDowell

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of McDowell you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 05:40, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 April 23#Pedal-cart

I had actually started to close that one, but real life got in the way and it was closed by the time I clicked edit. I disagree with how you closed it. A simple "no consensus" closure without any nuance doesn't help anyone because no one had advocated for keeping it as-is (with one editor explicitly stating it's inappropriate). Would you be willing to either revert your closure or modify it to one of the other options with an explanation why that one is best? -- Tavix ^(talk) 21:44, 2 May 2020 (UTC)

• Tavix - I'll just revert it. Dealing with that one's probably above my competence grade: Out of four or five !votes, there was three or four different suggestions. I'll let someone more experienced deal with that one. Hog Farm (talk) 21:52, 2 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Thanks, Hog Farm. Discussions like this one are tricky because it's almost impossible to close without feeling like you're supervoting (I like to call it "tie-breaking"). However, if explained well, they can be closed by capturing the essence of what most people want and I can at least shrug and say "good enough". -- Tavix ^(talk) 00:15, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
    • @Tavix: - I should probably stay away from closing RFDs and let the admins do the admin jobs from now on. Thanks for being gracious about this one. Hog Farm (talk) 01:41, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
      • Aw, well it was never my intention to discourage you from closing discussions... I would hope if you came across one with an obvious non-deletion result, that you would put it out of its misery. -- Tavix ^(talk) 02:00, 3 May 2020 (UTC)
        • Thanks. I actually started looking at closing occasionally based on advice from Doug Mehus, and I was starting to question the value of that advice after his ANI fun. Also, I'm not going to ping this because I don't want to go down Doug lane with his block. Hog Farm (talk) 02:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of McDowell

The article Battle of McDowell you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of McDowell for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:20, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Caulk's Field

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Caulk's Field you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 08:40, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for J. Johnston Pettigrew

On 3 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article J. Johnston Pettigrew, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that while commanding one of the last Confederate units north of the Potomac River during the retreat from Gettysburg, J. Johnston Pettigrew was mortally wounded but refused to be left in enemy hands? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/J. Johnston Pettigrew. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, J. Johnston Pettigrew), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 3 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of McDowell

The article Battle of McDowell you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of McDowell for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:21, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Caulk's Field

The article Battle of Caulk's Field you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Caulk's Field for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 08:40, 5 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Caulk's Field

The article Battle of Caulk's Field you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Caulk's Field for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 06:21, 6 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Prairie Grove

On 9 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Prairie Grove, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that after the Battle of Prairie Grove, the bodies of dead soldiers had to be protected in homemade enclosures to prevent feral hogs from eating them? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Prairie Grove. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Prairie Grove), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for May 9

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Battle of Mine Creek, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Battle of Glasgow (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 11:22, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Likelike

Can you review Likelike for GA?KAVEBEAR (talk) 21:41, 9 May 2020 (UTC)

Your thread has been archived

Hi Hog Farm! The thread you created at the Wikipedia:Teahouse, Sock votes on AFDs, has been archived because there was no discussion for a few days. You can still find the archived discussion here. If you have any additional questions that weren't answered then, please feel free to . The archival was done by Lowercase sigmabot III, and this notification was delivered by Muninnbot, both automated accounts. You can opt out of future notifications by placing {{bots|deny=Muninnbot}} here on your user talk page. Muninnbot (talk) 19:04, 11 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Mine Creek

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Mine Creek you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 14:20, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Marmiton River

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Marmiton River you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 00:00, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for First Battle of Newtonia

On 14 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article First Battle of Newtonia, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that despite winning the First Battle of Newtonia, the Confederate army retreated from Missouri? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/First Battle of Newtonia. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, First Battle of Newtonia), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

User:Soumya-8974 redirects

FYI, User:Soumya-8974 is now banned from creating redirects, so it's a fair assumption that those that you have listed at their talk page are pointless. Mutt Lunker (talk) 17:03, 14 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Mine Creek

The article Battle of Mine Creek you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Mine Creek for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 00:41, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Dan Osinski

Changes addressed; thanks for the review! Let me know if anything more is needed! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 02:14, 15 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Marmiton River

The article Battle of Marmiton River you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Marmiton River for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 13:21, 17 May 2020 (UTC)

1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate)

The long ref of Cunningham 2007 is missing. Would you mind adding it? Headbomb {t · c · p · b} 13:20, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Herb Plews

Changes addressed! Let me know if anything more is needed, and thanks for the review! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 13:25, 18 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 19:41, 19 May 2020 (UTC)

Discussion at Talk:Pasto Ventura/GA1

 You are invited to join the discussion at Talk:Pasto Ventura/GA1. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:40, 21 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate)

The article 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 00:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry (Consolidated)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry (Consolidated) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 23:01, 24 May 2020 (UTC)

Jim Delsing

Changes addressed; thanks for another review! Let me know if anything more is needed. Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 03:09, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

Question on the bundling

Is it possible to separately nominate the redirects now, or does WP:TOOSOON apply? OcelotCreeper (talk) 18:20, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

• @OcelotCreeper: - You can go ahead and do it now. The discussion was closed because of WP:TRAINWRECK, not the merit of the redirects. I'd recommend bundling the redirects as suggested by Thryduulf in the discussion, their groupings make sense. Hog Farm (talk) 18:24, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
  • Yeah I was going to do things that way if I could. Thanks for the reply. OcelotCreeper (talk) 18:30, 25 May 2020 (UTC)
    • Now that I've separately bundled the nominations, I ask for you respond on those discussions. OcelotCreeper (talk) 19:50, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of McDowell

On 26 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of McDowell, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Battle of McDowell, Confederate soldiers attempted to use the dead bodies of their comrades to build breastworks? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of McDowell. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of McDowell), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Vanamonde (Talk) 00:02, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

Appomattox Court House National Historical Park

Thanks for start on GA1. I respect your knowledge on the American Civil War and will follow your suggestions for improvements (as your ideas on this are far better than mine). I am thinking about and working the suggestions you have given me so far on upgrading this article. If I am way off base on something, let me know and I will correct. Thanks again for your constructive help.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:50, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks again for your inspirations. Appomattox Court House National Historical Park came out real good. Maybe we will meet again on another GAN or perhaps a Did You Know.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:35, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

You are an outstanding editor with many talents. I am thinking about doing an off line draft article and will start typing it up today. Maybe you can look it over when I am through typing it up and give me some advice on it. Hopefully my typed up article will become a DYK and GAN. Many of my articles I type up I have go through GOCE before I submit for GAN - then they can type up corrections that they find, which improves my odds of getting the GAN approved. I use the old fashion method of two-fingered typing, but it has worked for me to create 521 articles in 14 years at Wikipedia of which 97% have become Did You Know articles (500). Ten percent of those have become Good Articles. I type at about 50 words per minute. I'm from Michigan in the United States. What part of the world are you from that you do your typing from?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 15:01, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm from the US, too. I'm a really private person, so I never give anything much more specific than that. I've found out with my article-writing, if I send something I write through GOCE, it needs very few corrections, but if I don't, it's barely literate. Go figure. Currently I'm at 19 GAs and 9 DYKs, although most of that is improving articles, rather than starting from scratch. Hog Farm (talk) 20:16, 31 May 2020 (UTC)

Here is a Did You Know article I just typed up - grandfather of the typewriter.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 10:11, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Although I now live in northern Michigan, I previously lived in San Diego for 20 years. California is a wonderful state to live in.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:34, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I'll finish Old Appomattox Court House/GA1 tomorrow, when I recover some RAM after a night's sleep. What do you think of the Pratt article?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:51, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I finished anyway today Old Appomattox Court House/GA1. Can you take another look. I nominated Pratt for GAN, since I think it is ready. But then I am a little biased.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:22, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

I think the Pratt article looks very good, great job creating it. I've done a few copy edits in the article, I hope I didn't change your meaning anywhere. Hog Farm (talk) 20:44, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Thanks. You did excellent typing on the improvements. BTW, I have nominated McLean House (Appomattox, Virginia) for GAN. Thanks again for all your skills on improvement contributions on the articles I created and nominated for Good Article status.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:57, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

FYI, here are a couple of DYK speed records I made in the past = see captions under images.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:02, 1 June 2020 (UTC)

Here are my DYK Hall of Fame articles that received over 5,000 hits on the day featured. I think the Pratt article will be one of these IF (big "if") it is put into the #1 slot with the picture. We will see what happens.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 18:37, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

I've always wanted to get a DYK hook with 5,000 views. I topped out at 4,274 with Battle of Cane Hill, but considering that most of my DYKs are obscurities in American History, I'm not surprised. I just nominated a new one earlier today: Template:Did you know nominations/4th Missouri Infantry (Confederate). Hog Farm (talk) 04:07, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Idea 4 U = When you have a DYK with an interesting picture that you think may have a chance for over 5,000 views, THEN ask the Promoter if they might put it into slot #1 (like I did on the Pratt article). No gaurantee they will, but it increases your chance just by asking. It's happen to me more times than I can count. Notice the ones I got in the DYK Hall of Fame were ones with interesting pictures that attract a person's attention. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:10, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, my problem is that the subjects I write about generally don't have an interesting picture. In hindsight, on the 4th Missouri one, I could have added a picture of a flag style similar to the one the regiment carried, especially since one of the hooks was about the flag. That's the problem with writing about obscurities - It's hard to get 5,000 views when most of the article's I've created/improved/expanded run about 10 views a day. Hog Farm (talk) 20:13, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Another Idea 4 U = With your ACW knowledge you may be able to work this idea. My guess (you probably know for sure) is that this picture of the flag could be uploaded to Commons. If so, then modify your hook with ...that the flag (pictured) .... AND then add the picture to your DYK nomination. Its a little tricky to do this step (but it can be done), so perhaps get some help from an experienced DYK editor like User:Cwmhiraeth or User:Yoninah and they will do it for you. THEN, of course add the Comment I suggest for the Promoter (which may be one of the above).--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:51, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

I have no idea on the licensing, looking through that site, I can't tell exactly what the copyright status is, and I don't want to upload something marginal. There's an image currently in the article of the Van Dorn-pattern flag (File:The Van Dorn Flag.svg), do you think ...the flag (design pictured) ... would work? Hog Farm (talk) 22:04, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Yes, I do think that would work. To add a picture into a DYK nomination is a little tricky (but can be done). Perhaps you know how to do -> if not then ask one of the above Users to do it for you, as they BOTH know how to do that. However you modify the hook or make it an ALT2 I will approve the hook, because I believe everything is proper and correct (within policy using the file you suggest). Then hopefully it gets picked for the #1 position in the queue. My prediction is that it would receive over 5,000 views because that is a nice bright image that would be attractive. Good luck.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 09:34, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

If you want to do the flag image, I probably know how to add that to your DYK nomination. Just put in ALT2 and I will do the rest - even asking if the Promoter might put it in slot #1 position. I'll be back in a couple of hours. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 19:02, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I was offline most of today, but I've got the image added in (I'd had an image in my J. Johnston Pettigrew proposal, it got run as a non-image hook, I copied the syntax from there). How does it look? Thanks for all your help. Hog Farm (talk) 19:20, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

I asked for the #1 position. I have noticed in the past that when I have this request it takes a lot longer to get it into a DYK queue - mainly because the Promoters are trying to figure out which queue it goes into for the #1 slot. Moral of the story is to be patient. Do NOT panic if it seems like a long time before they are Promoting your DYK. It just means that they have to figure it out, IF there is a possibility for it to be placed into the #1 position with the image. In this case, time is in your favor. I have a good feeling on this one AND I think ultimately it will be placed into the #1 position and IT WILL get over 5,000 hits. Then, be sure to enter it into the DYK Hall of Fame for the applicable month (probably July or August). I have several in the Multiple Article Hook Hall of Fame.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:35, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Yeah, I've found out over time just to be patient with the DYK system, it'll get promoted at some point or another. I've had one (Template:Did you know nominations/Wade's Battery) moved into a prep after 1 day, I had another (Template:Did you know nominations/First Battle of Newtonia Historic District) take over a month, and I imagine that there's some that'll sit in there for ages. The only sure-fire way to know when it'll run is to get it approved for a special holding area, I've got one that'll run on June 22. Thanks for your help with this! Hog Farm (talk) 21:40, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

Yup, you never know how long it may take. Sometimes it takes several weeks. That's why I try to perfect my potential draft DYK as close as possible to be ready with everything needed. Then I can get a fast approval. Many approvals I get within hours of nomination. I have even set some records for fast approvals as shown under these images.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:50, 5 June 2020 (UTC)

• I have an interest in the ACW because I found out by doing my family genealogy my great uncle Thomas T. Caldwell was in the 7th Michigan Volunteer Infantry Regiment and ended up at Appomattox on April 9, 1865. He was wounded at the Battle of the Wilderness and ultimately died early in his life because of complications from his wounds.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:56, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for First Battle of Newtonia Historic District

On 29 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article First Battle of Newtonia Historic District, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a 2013 study by the National Park Service determined that the First Battle of Newtonia Historic District was not suitable for inclusion in its list of official units? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/First Battle of Newtonia Historic District. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, First Battle of Newtonia Historic District), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Landis's Battery

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Landis's Battery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 19:21, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Wade's Battery

On 30 May 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Wade's Battery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the men of Wade's Battery attempted to tunnel beneath enemy lines during the Siege of Vicksburg? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Wade's Battery. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Wade's Battery), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:01, 30 May 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	With copious amounts of writing and reviewing you certainly are making the 'pedia a better place and I've enjoyed both reviewing your articles and having you review mine. Keep up the good work! Eddie891 Talk Work 00:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Many thanks. Hog Farm (talk) 04:12, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry (Consolidated)

The article 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry (Consolidated) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1st and 4th Missouri Infantry (Consolidated) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 00:21, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Proposal

Hi, since the backlog drive is over, how 'bout we trade GA reviews? I'll do 4th Missouri Infantry (Confederate), and you do my GAN? L293D (☎ • ✎) 03:03, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

• @L293D: - Sounds good to me! I'm always happy to review a GAN. Hog Farm (talk) 03:38, 3 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of L293D -- L293D (talk) 02:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Landis's Battery

The article Landis's Battery you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Landis's Battery for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 11:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wade's Battery

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Wade's Battery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 11:02, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wade's Battery

The article Wade's Battery you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Wade's Battery for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 12:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of L293D -- L293D (talk) 19:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Landis's Battery

The article Landis's Battery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Landis's Battery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 20:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Wade's Battery

The article Wade's Battery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Wade's Battery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Harrias -- Harrias (talk) 20:41, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

QPQs

I keep a running tab total of my Did You Know reviews and then when I need a QPQ I take it off my list. I don't know if you do similar.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:20, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

Welcome to Milhist!

G'day Hog Farm, I won't give you the template welcome message because you know your way around the project already. Great to have you onboard! Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:39, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Also, if you would like to receive the Milhist monthly newsletter The Bugle, you can sign up at User:The ed17/sandbox3. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:48, 6 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 06:41, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

Did You Know Hall of Fame

• Many times another DYK project editor will enter in your article into the Hall of Fame, like User:Yoninah did when one of my recent Did you know articles got over 5,000 hits. Wait a week and see what happens. If it is NOT entered in by another editor, you can enter it in yourself. I think 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) will be such an article that will belong into the DYK Hall of Fame when it becomes an official Did You Know (my guess is it will get 8-9,000 views +/-).--Doug Coldwell (talk) 11:47, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

• I decided to set up my own user subpage to track my DYKs User:Hog Farm/DYK views. Ironically, the hook I thought was the blandest got the most views. Hog Farm (talk) 16:03, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

• Also after you get 25 Did You Knows you can be put your name on this list and start collecting ribbons like I have and displaying them on your User page. Many of my ideas for potential Did You Knows came from Famous First Facts. There are only about 10,000 possibilities to picked from in the latest International edition. I took some 500 to create articles from. They are well vetted sources to use and you will find many references to support the "First" fact.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 12:08, 7 June 2020 (UTC)

• It so happens there is an online PDF for Famous First Facts if you put in Google "Famous First Facts" "Fifth edition" PDF (first one of Joseph Nathan Kane 210.47.10.86). Search the term "Civil War" and item 5400 is on Nelson August Moore. There is an article on Kensington Soldier's Monument, but not on Moore. He would make a good Did You Know article since he designed this FIRST monument to commemorate the ACW. Thought maybe you might be interested in this. It would become one of those Hall of Fame articles. There so happens to be a lot of information online about him, so you could write up a Did You Know article and Good Article biography on him. From this PDF is where I found over 400 articles to create as Did You Knows. Secret's out! --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:47, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

• Thanks! Hopefully I'll get to that one in the future. I'm currently working on another draft that's about done at User:Hog Farm/Harris' Missouri Battery (1864). I'm a student who's home for the summer, so I'm trying to get any articles written over the summer that would require books my parents have with them before I go back to school and leave the books behind. Hog Farm (talk) 20:53, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

• I do similar, except I write up my drafts offline. Then when I am all done I red-link the subject/person that's already in another article and drop it in as 1 edit. Surprises many editors that I can have a complete ready to go Did You Know article fully referenced in just 1 edit. The truth is that it took hundreds of little edits, BUT only shows up as one edit (since it was constructed offline). BTW, I operate 3 PCs at the same time in my editing. Thanks for reviewing my GANs.--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:09, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

• @Doug Coldwell: - I got 5,000 + on a DYK hook! I got 8787 for a #2 slot hook about the Battle of Mine Creek! Hog Farm (talk) 15:34, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

• Great. Try to enter that into the DYK Hall of Fame for June 2020. It's something you should probably learn how to do, then you know for sure your article gets recorded there. It probably will not be that difficult for you to do. Just open that edit section and copy another's entry into the right place (numerically) and then correct with YOUR information. You don't have to wait until another experienced DYK editor enters it. You CAN do it yourself. Good Luck. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:01, 10 June 2020 (UTC)
• I went ahead and added your Battle of Mine Creek Did You Know record to the June_2020 DYK Hall of Fame. --Doug Coldwell (talk) 20:31, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Mine Creek

On 9 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Mine Creek, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the Battle of Mine Creek was one of the largest battles between mounted cavalry during the American Civil War? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Mine Creek. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Mine Creek), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:01, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Autopatrolled granted

Hi Hog Farm, I just wanted to let you know that I have added the "autopatrolled" permission to your account, as you have created numerous, valid articles. This feature will have no effect on your editing, and is simply intended to reduce the workload on new page patrollers. For more information on the autopatrolled right, see Wikipedia:Autopatrolled. However, you should consider adding relevant wikiproject talk-page templates, stub-tags and categories to new articles that you create if you aren't already in the habit of doing so, since your articles will no longer be systematically checked by other editors (User:Evad37/rater and User:SD0001/StubSorter.js are useful scripts which can help). Feel free to leave me a message if you have any questions. Happy editing! Schwede66 17:18, 9 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of No Great Shaker -- No Great Shaker (talk) 10:41, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

GA Review question

I have noticed from time to time that after a Reviewer does the GA review, they say something to the effect that it is on Hold for 7 days. How strict is the 7 days? Does that mean ALL ISSUES have to resolved before this time. What would happen if I took 10 days or 15 days to solve some complicated issue (but was able to solve the little issues)? Is the GAN rejected then? Do you know how this goes?--Doug Coldwell (talk) 16:29, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Most reviewers aren't very strict with that. I've kept some open for over two months before. Generally the only time it gets failed after seven days is if you don't respond to the review within seven days. Most reviewers will keep it open as long as you're actively working on the article. Hog Farm (talk) 17:53, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Got it. Thanks!--Doug Coldwell (talk) 21:45, 10 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Big Black River Bridge

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Big Black River Bridge you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 01:00, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Big Black River Bridge

The article Battle of Big Black River Bridge you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Battle of Big Black River Bridge for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 23:40, 13 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Big Black River Bridge

The article Battle of Big Black River Bridge you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Big Black River Bridge for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 05:01, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Missouri Barnstar

		The Missouri Barnstar of Merit
		This Missouri Barnstar is awarded to Hog Farm for creating an impressive amount of content related to the American Civil War in Missouri. Thank you for you work in producing both quantity and quality content. Grey Wanderer (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Original Barnstar
	Nice work on Battle of Grand Gulf. Magnolia677 (talk) 10:18, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 3rd Missouri Light Battery

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 3rd Missouri Light Battery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 14:01, 15 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate)

Hello! Your submission of 1st Missouri Infantry (Confederate) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 23:58, 16 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Harris' Missouri Battery (1864)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Harris' Missouri Battery (1864) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 21:21, 18 June 2020 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

	The Barnstar of Diligence
	Thanks for adding short description to 1877 U. S. Patent Office fire. That gave me the idea to add that to the article I created on 1836 U.S. Patent Office fire. Doug Coldwell (talk) 17:50, 20 June 2020 (UTC)

Backlog

At Wikipedia:WikiProject Deletion sorting/Fictional elements. Some stuff is getting relisted. We could use more comments from the experienced editors. Cheers, --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:51, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 1st Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 22 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1st Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 1,000 men fought in the 1st Missouri Infantry Regiment, the first unit from the state to officially enter the Confederate States Army? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1st Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des​ 22:54, 20 June 2020 (UTC) 12:01, 22 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 19:21, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 3rd Missouri Light Battery

The article 3rd Missouri Light Battery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:3rd Missouri Light Battery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 19:21, 23 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Grand Gulf

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Battle of Grand Gulf you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:40, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:41, 24 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Landis' Missouri Battery

On 25 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Landis' Missouri Battery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the fire of Landis' Missouri Battery helped clear the way for an infantry charge at the Second Battle of Corinth? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Landis' Missouri Battery), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Harris' Missouri Battery (1864)

The article Harris' Missouri Battery (1864) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Harris' Missouri Battery (1864) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 00:02, 25 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:01, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:41, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:42, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 12:02, 26 June 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Battle of Grand Gulf

The article Battle of Grand Gulf you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Battle of Grand Gulf for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 00:01, 27 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated)

On 28 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated) lost six colorbearers at the Battle of Champion Hill? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 1st and 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 28 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 3rd Missouri Light Battery

On 30 June 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 3rd Missouri Light Battery, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the second commander of the 3rd Missouri Light Battery was elected by the men of the battery after the original commander was transferred away from the unit? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/3rd Missouri Light Battery. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 3rd Missouri Light Battery), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 1 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a mine was detonated under the position of part of the 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) on July 1, 1863, during the Siege of Vicksburg? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski ^{(talk • contribs)} 00:04, 1 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 2 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Siege of Vicksburg, the former commander of the 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment stated that the regiment "died once, and can die again"? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

WikiCup 2020 July newsletter

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
• The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
• Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 5 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more men died while serving in the 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment than any other Missouri unit of the Confederate States Army? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 16th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:02, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 08:21, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

June 2020 Military History Writers' Contest

		The Writer's Barnstar
		Hearty congratulations on an impressive set of articles, and here is a barnstar in recognition of your hard work in coming second last month with 119 points from 19 articles. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:07, 5 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Big Black River Bridge

On 6 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Big Black River Bridge, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a number of Confederate cannons were captured at the Battle of Big Black River Bridge because battery horses were posted on the wrong side of the river? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Big Black River Bridge. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Big Black River Bridge), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 00:01, 6 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 01:01, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:9th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 01:42, 7 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK nomination of 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hello! Your submission of 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know! Yoninah (talk) 06:51, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated)

The article 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 07:21, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:01, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 8 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that at the Battle of Grand Gulf, men of the Confederate 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment fired into the portholes of Union Navy ships?? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.— Maile (talk) 16:11, 8 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:42, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:42, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 05:01, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment

The article Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 06:22, 10 July 2020 (UTC)

April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive

		The Order of the Superior Scribe of Wikipedia
		Thank you for completing an incredible 74 reviews in the April–May 2020 GAN Backlog drive. Your work helped us to reduce the backlog by over 60%. Regards, Harrias talk 08:07, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Harris' Missouri Battery (1864)

On 11 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Harris' Missouri Battery (1864), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that Harris' Missouri Battery was formed in an 1864 reorganization that may not have been authorized? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Harris' Missouri Battery (1864). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Harris' Missouri Battery (1864)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 12:02, 11 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

Hello! Your submission of 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) at the Did You Know nominations page has been reviewed, and some issues with it may need to be clarified. Please review the comment(s) at your nomination's entry and respond there as soon as possible. Thank you for contributing to Did You Know!

Great job; just one minor thing. —  AjaxSmack  01:09, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:3rd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 11:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment

The article Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 23:41, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

Great job on this, BTW! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:57, 12 July 2020 (UTC)

@Peacemaker67: - Many thanks. I actually felt like this was one of my lower outputs. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:32, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Not at all mate. You are improving all the time, quite rapidly actually. I'm a fairly harsh taskmaster at GAN, but it'll set you up for higher levels of assessment. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:43, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for July 13

An automated process has detected that when you recently edited Westport Confederate order of battle, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Harris' Missouri Battery (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver).

(Opt-out instructions.) --DPL bot (talk) 06:16, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue CLXXI, July 2020

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Hadrian's Wall and Hawkeye7 on the British military Op-ed: Nick-D on diversity and military history

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Nick-D (talk) 11:45, 13 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:12th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 09:21, 14 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:21, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:2nd Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Eddie891 -- Eddie891 (talk) 12:02, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

First Battle of Newtonia

Could you add anything which you have in hand, don't worry if it ends up a bit bloated, it is always easy to cut down. Then give it a good proof read and copy edit, then ping me and I'll give it a working over.

I assume that you want to go straight to FAC, not via ACR?

A couple of first thoughts - check your "Sources". Eg:

• Shouldn't Foote be Foote & Gardner?
• You sure about that ISBN? They didn't exist in 1958.

The flag image. Are you sure that flags count as two-dimensional? An open question - I don't know.

• • I've nominated the file for deletion at Commons, actually. I think it should be PD, but the source claims that special permission is needed for commercial use after further digging. I'm posting it there out of an abundance of caution. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:12, 17 July 2020 (UTC)
    • Looks like it's actually likely to be kept, so I guess the licensing is correct. Hog Farm _Bacon 03:44, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Gog the Mild (talk) 13:12, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

It's actually gone through a MILHIST ACR. At the moment it has four supports and passed image and source reviews. Hog Farm _Bacon 13:46, 16 July 2020 (UTC)

• • @Gog the Mild: If you don't mind me asking, where are you finding Gardner? I'm seeing no mention of Gardner in the copyright pages of my copy of Foote. The ISBN issue was courtesy me using the wrong edition. Hog Farm _Bacon 02:27, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

Of course I don't mind. Ask whatever you want. Occasionally you may even get a sensible answer. When I put the ISBN into WorldCat I got this. But it seems that that is just the audiobook - my mistake. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:00, 17 July 2020 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: - I've checked the sources and made a few minor edition/orig-year corrections, done a minor expansion (mostly in the September 29 section and the early part of the battle itself), and gave the article a copyedit. I'm still waiting on the ACR (Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/First Battle of Newtonia) to close, it has the required supports/passes. Whenever you have time, I'm ready for you to look at the article. I can wait as long as needed. Hog Farm _Bacon 04:48, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 04:01, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

Madison Bumgarner

Made 1st round of changes; let me know if there's anything more! I've been pretty busy lately, but I'll address any changes you suggest - just don't be alarmed if it takes a few days. Thanks for yet another review! Sanfranciscogiants17 (talk) 18:51, 19 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 20 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the flag of the 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) is on display at the Museum of the Confederacy? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 4th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:01, 20 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment

On 21 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that when originally organized, the 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment contained only eight companies, which violated Confederate regulations? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 9th Missouri Infantry Regiment), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des​ 21:52, 18 July 2020 (UTC) 12:02, 21 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated)

On 23 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more than 60 percent of the members of the 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated) became casualties at the Battle of Franklin? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 2nd and 6th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Consolidated)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cwmhiraeth (talk) 12:02, 23 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 24 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a Missouri Confederate infantry regiment lost many men on Graveyard Hill? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 24 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Battle of Port Gibson, the 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) was sometimes only 10 feet (3.0 m) away from the enemy? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 5th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Wug·a·po·des​ 19:19, 21 July 2020 (UTC) 12:01, 24 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

On 27 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate), which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that more men of the 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment were captured at the Battle of Helena than remained in the regiment two days later? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate). You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, 10th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 27 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment

On 28 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that a report that Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment, which was formed in 1864, was armed with lances instead of firearms is likely inaccurate? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Slayback's Missouri Cavalry Regiment), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

—valereee (talk) 12:01, 28 July 2020 (UTC)

DYK for Battle of Grand Gulf

On 29 July 2020, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Battle of Grand Gulf, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that only three Confederate soldiers were killed at the Battle of Grand Gulf, but one of them was the commander of Fort Wade? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Battle of Grand Gulf. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Battle of Grand Gulf), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 12:02, 29 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate)

The article 11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:11th Missouri Infantry Regiment (Confederate) for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 02:21, 30 July 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bledsoe's Missouri Battery

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Bledsoe's Missouri Battery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 14:03, 1 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Missouri Field Battery

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article 1st Missouri Field Battery you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:41, 5 August 2020 (UTC)

Bruinsburg, Mississippi

Thanks for linking to Bruinsburg, Mississippi. I noticed you tagged the article as needing more citations. I wrote that article a while ago, and added my inline citations at the end of each section, instead of at the end of each sentence. I'm meticulous with my sourcing however, and every word in the article was sourced. Please consider removing the tag. Thanks. Magnolia677 (talk) 06:23, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

• @Magnolia677: Sounds good. Tag is gone. Hog Farm _Bacon 13:51, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Hey thanks. I looked at the article and only one of my original links is dead. I'll go back and fix it when I get a minute. I wrote articles for most the ghost towns on the Mississippi River in Mississippi, and I was astounded by the number of other articles that link to Bruinsburg, Mississippi. Cheers! Magnolia677 (talk) 15:29, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Missouri Field Battery

The article 1st Missouri Field Battery you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:1st Missouri Field Battery for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 11:21, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Bledsoe's Missouri Battery

The article Bledsoe's Missouri Battery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Bledsoe's Missouri Battery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 23:41, 6 August 2020 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of 1st Missouri Field Battery

The article 1st Missouri Field Battery you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:1st Missouri Field Battery for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already appeared on the main page as a "Did you know" item, or as a bold link under "In the News" or in the "On This Day" prose section, you can nominate it within the next seven days to appear in DYK. Bolded names with dates listed at the bottom of the "On This Day" column do not affect DYK eligibility. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Peacemaker67 -- Peacemaker67 (talk) 03:21, 7 August 2020 (UTC)

New Page Patrol – May 2023 Backlog Drive

New Page Patrol | May 2023 Backlog Drive
On 1 May, a one-month backlog drive for New Page Patrol will begin. Barnstars will be awarded based on the number of redirects patrolled and for maintaining a streak throughout the drive. Article patrolling is not part of the drive. Sign up here! There is a possibility that the drive may not run if there are <20 registered participants. Participants will be notified if this is the case.
You're receiving this message because you are a new page patroller. To opt out of future mailings, please remove yourself here.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:12, 20 April 2023 (UTC)