User talk:YellowMonkey/Archive172

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

DYK for Lauren Ebsary[edit]

Updated DYK query On April 24, 2010, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article Lauren Ebsary, which you created or substantially expanded. You are welcome to check how many hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, quick check ) and add it to DYKSTATS if it got over 5,000. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Materialscientist (talk) 08:02, 24 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Wow, barnstar![edit]

Thanks YM. I'm not sure how I've deserved that, but it's fun to get artwork! Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:31, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rene Farrell[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Sarah Andrews (cricketer)[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 08:04, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DYK for Rachael Haynes[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)


DYK for Alex Blackwell (cricketer)[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 28 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Shelley Nitschke[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:03, 29 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


DYK for Erin Osborne[edit]

The DYK project (nominate) 08:02, 29 April 2010 (UTC)

DYK for Julie Hunter[edit]

Thanks from me and the wiki Victuallers (talk) 00:03, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]


DYK for Jess Cameron[edit]

Materialscientist (talk) 00:02, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Whitlam[edit]

Would you mind taking another look at the article and commenting at FAC? I think I have addressed your concerns.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:35, 1 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Keith Miller[edit]

I think there's a few things in the book by Bowes, and there might be something in Frith's Bodyline. I'll have a look tonight and stick anything in that I find. There's quite a bit in Wisden I think, which gives the English reaction to Miller. --Sarastro1 (talk) 07:19, 19 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:49, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nothing missing that I can find. Had a quick look through a few things that I've got, but there's nothing there that you don't already have. Mainly about the short stuff and his duel with Hutton. Perhaps a few bits could be added on this, and I can certainly reference it if you want me to add anything; it's mainly the idea that Miller and Lindwall targeted bouncers at Hutton to unsettle him. However, the focus of this would be more on Hutton than Miller, so not sure it's relevant. It also relies a bit on the idea that Australia were worried about Hutton, which I'm not completely convinced about. The only other thing I noticed is that you say Miller's 79 in the first test was his first test innings, but did he not bat on his debut the season before against New Zealand? Article looks good otherwise. I'll comment on the review page in the next few days after I finish off the article I'm working on. --Sarastro1 (talk) 19:59, 20 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Go right ahead and add! Yes, there seems to be an unfortunate dislaimer that it was his first Ashes innings, not his first Test innings. :( YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 00:21, 21 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added some comments to the review. Couldn't find the reference to Hutton that I mentioned, but found some stuff about how Hutton was a bit overawed at first by Miller and Lindwall. I'll add a bit in the next day or two. I can probably also add a bit about the targeting of Hutton from Wisden. Just need to decide where to add it in the article! --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:58, 27 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok. It could go in the playing role if it is generic strategy YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:33, 28 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haven't had a chance to add anything on Hutton yet, as I've been out of action for a few days. I will try to add it at some point, but it is not important as far as FA goes, so I've just added my support. --Sarastro1 (talk) 14:04, 3 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Help with DYK submission[edit]

Hi - I'm currently preparing to submit Gia Lam Airport for a DYK in the next couple of days. Do you have any experience with DYK submissions, or any comments or suggestions for the article - failing that, would you know who I could ask for help? Thanks --dragfyre (talk 14:44, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah. I submitted about 270 of them and used to turn it over for about 2 years. The article needs to be a 5X prose expansion, so it might need a paragraph or two extra to make it across. Apart from that I don't see any problem with it that would stop it from passing. Grenouille vert (talk · contribs) is also more up to pace with VCP army content than I am, he might be able to spot it. The submission process shouldn't be difficult you should fill the form at T:DYKT now YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:55, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. Thanks a lot for the suggestions! --dragfyre (talk 18:06, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 3 May 2010[edit]

Zorglbot[edit]

YM, Zorglbot runs through WP:FA right around 0 UTC, so if you edit FA right then, you're likely to edit conflict and stall the bot ... just so you're aware ... I'll go back and bold today's TFA.[1] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

User:Bloodmerchant[edit]

is adding Chinese characters to Vietnamese-related articles. DHN (talk) 01:05, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Watching YellowMonkey (bananabucket!) 02:11, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FAR nom Canberra[edit]

I have nominated Canberra for a featured article review here. Please join the discussion on whether this article meets featured article criteria. Articles are typically reviewed for two weeks. If substantial concerns are not addressed during the review period, the article will be moved to the Featured Article Removal Candidates list for a further period, where editors may declare "Keep" or "Remove" the article's featured status. The instructions for the review process are here. -- Cirt (talk) 16:14, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : L (April 2010)[edit]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue L (April 2010)
From the coordinators

It's been a month since the end of the coordinator elections, and I am proud to inform the project that the IX coordinator tranche is doing well. Our new coordinators are rapidly learning the ropes, and the last of the task forces under consideration for merging have been consolidated into a new task force which should increase productivity and improve quality article output.

At the moment the coordinators are discussing preliminary plans for an improved version of The Bugle, and are working with editors from the American Civil War task force who are in the process of organizing a new special project relating to that conflict. It is our hope to see these changes implemented in the upcoming month. Lastly, as many of our members are also in school, we extend our best wishes to all who will be taking final exams both this month and next. For the IX coordinator tranche, TomStar81 (Talk) 22:36, 30 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Articles of note

New featured articles:

  1. Battle of Dürenstein
  2. Battle of Pulo Aura
  3. Battle of Taejon
  4. Battle of The Cedars
  5. Brougham Castle
  6. Cleomenean War
  7. Harry Chauvel
  8. Japanese battleship Yamato
  9. Lester Brain
  10. Myles Standish
  11. Roderic Dallas
  12. USS President (1800)
  13. War of the Bavarian Succession

New featured lists:

  1. Order of battle at the Battle of Camperdown

New featured topics:

  1. Yamato class battleships

New featured portals:

  1. Biological warfare

New A-Class articles:

  1. 22nd Regiment Massachusetts Volunteer Infantry
  2. Battle of Chochiwon
  3. Battle of Chonan
  4. Battle of Naktong Bulge
  5. Battle of Pyongtaek
  6. Battle of Slater's Knoll
  7. Battle of The Cedars
  8. Battle of Valcour Island
  9. Brian Eaton
  10. Douglas MacArthur
  11. Heinrich Prinz zu Sayn-Wittgenstein
  12. HMAS Australia (1911)
  13. Kongō class battlecruiser‎
  14. List of battleships of Germany
  15. Massachusetts in the American Civil War
  16. Operation Sandblast
  17. Order of Saint Hubert (Bavarian)
  18. Ordnance QF 25-pounder Short
  19. Petlyakov Pe-3
  20. SMS Helgoland
  21. Sovetsky Soyuz class battleship
Project news
Contest department
Awards and honours
Editorial: Milhist's special projects

This month we're taking a look at the Military history WikiProject's special projects. At present we have three—Operation Great War Centennial, Operation Majestic Titan, and Operation Normandy—with, as Tom mentions in his introduction, a fourth coming on line as this newsletter goes out.

  • Operation Great War Centennial

    Officially the longest running of our special projects, this started in December 2008 with the ambitious goal of improving our core articles relating to the First World War by June 2014. As it states on the project's page, "the centenary of the start of World War I ... will doubtless be a mammoth commemoration of one of the most significant wars in history, attracting vast interest from schools, universities, veterans groups and the media. It offers us the chance to showcase what a brilliant resource Wikipedia is". With World War I receiving well over 20,000 page views per day on most days, the truth of these words is evident and the opportunity too good to miss. Operation Great War Centennial has compiled a list of over 300 articles covering topics such as battles, geographical areas, people, armaments, and technology; while some have achieved featured or good status, the majority are at B-Class or below, so there is plenty there for willing editors to get their teeth into.

  • Operation Majestic Titan

    The home of our much-respected and admired "Battleship Cabal", Operation Majestic Titan started in June 2009 with the aim of creating the "single largest featured topic on Wikipedia, centered around the battleships considered, planned, built, operated, canceled, or otherwise recorded." At time of writing the prolific Majestic Titan team has produced an impressive 33 featured articles, 19 A-Class, 60 good articles, three featured topics and six good topics. According to the project's working list, there are only 427 more articles to go...

  • Operation Normandy

    Although it first appeared in Milhist's pages in March 2010, this project had been formerly operating out of Cam's userspace as the "Normandy Team" since May 2008, making it a contender for our longest-running unofficial special project. Operation Normandy is aiming to create a Featured Topic on the Second World War Battle of Normandy by the 70th Anniversary of D-Day on 6 June 2014. With nine featured articles so far and 29 more to go, progress has been steady. More help, however, is always welcome.

  • Our fourth special project, American Civil War Sesquicentennial, is in the process of organising and at present lacks a name (see this discussion if you have any suggestions). The project will be looking to improve Wikipedia's coverage of the American Civil War by its sesquicentennial anniversary in 2011. The beginning of a drive is always an exciting time to get involved, so interested editors are strongly encouraged to drop by and sign up.

Special projects are a great way of organising a long-term collaboration with a specific end-point in mind, and tend to be more goal-oriented and focused than the general task forces or informal working groups. Joining a special project is also a fantastic way to work alongside like-minded editors with whom you'll undoubtedly develop close working relationships; by your third or fourth FA submission you'll hopefully be operating as part of a well-oiled team. Editor roles are many and varied: content writers, source material providers, image- and map-makers, copy editors, reviewers, MoS gurus, wikignomes, specialists and generalists... you're sure to find a job that suits you and benefits the team. If you have an idea for a special project or are already undertaking a collaboration that you think fits in with the ethos of those above, and you'd like to benefit from Milhist's support and infrastructure, consider dropping the coordinators a note. Personally I've found the synergy and teamwork of contributing to a special project (Operation Normandy in my case) to be one of the most rewarding and enjoyable aspects of my time here. I hope you will too. EyeSerenetalk 14:16, 4 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 18:38, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FAR query[edit]

Hi YM, would you mind commenting here? The issue of sticking to the one-nom-at-a-time rule at FAR has been raised again. Cheers, SlimVirgin talk contribs 20:58, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, just pinging you again, as people are wondering how best to proceed. SlimVirgin talk contribs 01:53, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GAN backlog elimination drive award[edit]

The Working Wikipedian's Barnstar
For reviewing 6 good article nominations during the April 2010 GAN backlog elimination drive, I hereby present you The Working Man's Barnstar. Nice job! Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:34, 5 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved[edit]

Yep. But still got to finish off lots of SA/Adelaide articles ! - Peripitus (Talk) 00:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent additions to the SA/OTD templates[edit]

Hi there,

Some of the events that you have recently added to the SA/OTD templates over the past few days may no longer qualify. The page Wikipedia:Days of the year was recently made an official Wikipedia guideline, detailing the criteria of inclusion on the day-of-the-month list pages. This has affected WP:OTD because a long-standing rule there, #3, reads,

The event and the selected article (bolded item) needs to be listed in the Events section of its corresponding day-of-the-year article.[2]

This WP:OTD rule has now been amended to mention the official WP:DOY guidelines.[3]

Therefore, I recommend you double check the edits you have previously made, because events like this one and this one that, as currently written, may appear questionable under WP:DOY may be reverted from now on. Cheers. Zzyzx11 (talk) 05:08, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Semi-protection[edit]

Hi YM, there have been a few requests on RfPP recently to unprotect pages you've semi-protected indefinitely after very little vandalism, including a couple you protected today. In case you see me undo some of these, it's because there's been a request. In future it's best just to revert if there have only been one or two inappropriate edits. Cheers, SlimVirgin talk contribs 21:23, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I don't wish to get poke my nose in where it's not wanted and have no comment on your protections, but I think it's common courtesy for me to let you know I've unprotected Murali Vijay and Yusuf Pathan after seemingly valid requests at WP:RFUP. Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:06, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 10 May 2010[edit]

The Wikipedia Signpost: 17 May 2010[edit]

1920–21 Burnley F.C. season[edit]

Hi there, I have left a message in response to your comment at the FAC of the above article. Unfortunately, there aren't any existing sources about the record-breaking team, and that's why there is very little information about playing style, etc. Cheers, BigDom 06:12, 14 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Cowabunga438 again[edit]

You recently blocked Cowabunga438 (talk · contribs) for edit warring on Jessica Watson, but his IP is still active and edit warring on the article. He's at 114.73.19.106 (talk · contribs · WHOIS), and just added back the information again [4] for what looks like the tenth time today. Would you mind either blocking the IP, or semi-protecting the page? He uses the talk page, but doesn't seem to understand what it's for. Thanks in advance. Dayewalker (talk) 06:08, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Done YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

example.com[edit]

I have been seeing many new vandlism articleso new articles page with example.com as external links. Most of them seem to be from newly created accounts. Can you please use checkuser to find if it all are the same person? Here is one suchGeorge S. Thanos and its User:Tukenk --EvilFlyingMonkey (talk) 13:59, 12 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Moved[edit]

Yep. But still got to finish off lots of SA/Adelaide articles ! - Peripitus (Talk) 00:44, 6 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Watchlist[edit]

Done, I'll look after them from time to time, tired of those nationalists and religious fanatics, though. Grenouille vert (talk) 07:40, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

July 2009 Ürümqi riots is at FAC[edit]

Hi, YellowMonkey. You commented at a previous FAC for this article, so I just wanted to let you know that it is at FAC again (here) if you are interested in commenting again. Thanks, rʨanaɢ (talk) 15:41, 7 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Life sucks for us with no WikiProject sponsorship. Even with no complaints, minimum 3.5 weeks at FAC due to no support base and no reply :( YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:32, 13 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rhodes FAC[edit]

Thanks! Quite a relief to get it in the end! I'm hoping to put Jardine up next, it's still at peer review for a little longer. Fingers crossed. I noticed the Miller in '48 article is up now. I'll have a look at it in the next day or two to see if I've got anything. --Sarastro1 (talk) 20:20, 10 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:YellowMonkey/Archive172&oldid=1139990924"