User talk:Dana boomer

This user may have left Wikipedia. Dana boomer has not edited Wikipedia since 1 December 2016. As a result, any requests made here may not receive a response. If you are seeking assistance, you may need to approach someone else.

Military history WikiProject
Articles for review
Featured Article candidates Jozo Tomasevich • Battle of Tinian • Brighton hotel bombing • Battle of Saipan • Siege of Baghdad • British nuclear weapons and the Falklands War
Featured Article Review Candidates Byzantine Empire • Battle of Red Cliffs • Edward I of England • Northrop YF-23 • Middle Ages • Thomas C. Hindman
Featured List Candidates List of Eureka Stockade defenders
A-Class Review (Criteria/FAQ) Henry Biard • Fort Corcoran • Sihanouk Trail • Boot Monument • Miyoshi Nagayoshi • Ernest J. King • Tim Hughes (soldier) • Lockheed YF-22
Good Article Nominations Ava–Hanthawaddy War (1401–1403) • Suleiman I of Candar • Aérospatiale SA 330 Puma • Mehmed of Dulkadir • 1864 Washington Arsenal explosion • Roswell incident • Maximiliano Hernández Martínez • Mohammad Shah Qajar • Gubir shootdown • Gotha WD.7 • Constantine II (emperor) • Battle of Lewisburg • Eleanor of Castile • Charles Upham • Soldiers' and Sailors' Arch • Destruction of cultural heritage during the Israeli invasion of the Gaza Strip • Northrop B-2 Spirit • Udagbedo • Battle of Ekiokpagha • Simon Stuart (general) • Ernie Pike • Duncan MacDougall (British Army officer) • 170th Rifle Division (Soviet Union) • Alfred Sully • Dabney Coleman • Benin Air Force • Battle of Mosul (2016–2017) • Crusading movement • Battle of Thorgo • Jarrett Robertson • Michael Robinson (RAF officer) • Rumpler 6B • Tel al-Sultan attack • Charles Keating IV
Good Article Reassessments Kowloon Walled City • Tsugaru clan
Peer Review Muckrach Castle • Military logistics • Military dictatorship • Henry Clay Work • Galatian War • Charles the Bold
See the full list of open tasks
v t e

Peer reviews with no or minimal feedback
October 26 Campbell's Soup Cans May 2 Nuclear clock May 25 Nodoroc June 24 Michael Biggs July 18 Henry Clay Work
If your review is not in the list of unanswered reviews, you can add it.
v t e

Archives
December 2007 - May 2008 June 2008 - September 2008 October 2008 - December 2008 January 2009 - June 2009 July 2009 - March 2010 April 2010 - September 2010 October 2010 - December 2010 January 2011 - April 2011 May 2011 - December 2011 January 2012 - February 2012 March 2012 - August 2012 September 2012 - December 2012 January 2013 - July 2013

• As a listed GA participant, you are invited to contribute to a formal Request for Comment on the question of whether Good Articles should be eligible to appear in the Did You Know? slot in future. Please see the proposal on its subpage here, or on the main DYK talk page. To add the discussion to your watchlist, click this link. Thank you in advance. Gilderien Chat|Contributions02:56, 1 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Who is directing FAR now that Raul654 has gone on hiatus? The message on his talk page says, "Raul654 has not edited since February 2013." It seems like maybe FAR should have another director if the current director has been absent for six months. 69.125.134.86 (talk) 23:43, 14 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Please see the lengthy recent discussion regarding Raul and the position of FA director in general on WT:FAC, and participate there if you feel so inclined. Dana boomer (talk) 00:08, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was wondering if you'd do the GA review on this article. PumpkinSky talk 10:02, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll see what I can do. Life's been a bit crazy lately :) Dana boomer (talk) 11:16, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MTBW and I would really appreciate it. It's a very interesting and unique story. Thanks PumpkinSky talk 13:28, 15 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

And really, really FUN! (Hint: Horse once ate $30 of poker chips...) Montanabw^(talk) 05:35, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, I've read through most of the article at various points before, and looked at most of the references/illustrations, so reviewing it for GAN wouldn't take that long. I just need to sit down and actually do it. Hopefully this afternoon? I'll try to give it a shot, but if something comes up I might not be able to. Dana boomer (talk) 11:55, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK PumpkinSky talk 23:29, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

MTBW says she can have the lead done by Monday. Is that OK? She wants to reread it, etc. PumpkinSky talk 23:17, 22 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that's fine. I have the review page watchlisted; just ping me there when the changes have been made. Dana boomer (talk) 11:34, 23 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did some work on the lead, such as adding the two wounds and poker chips. PumpkinSky talk 11:32, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

ITD helped too. PumpkinSky talk 22:16, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ping! I think we are ready for the final run-through. I finished my (overdue) promise of redoing the lede. Montanabw^(talk) 23:09, 27 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Dana, it's a much better article now. Great review. PumpkinSky talk 21:55, 31 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. Regarding the recent revert you made: you may already know about them, but you might find Wikipedia:Template messages/User talk namespace useful. After a revert, these can be placed on the user's talk page to let them know you considered their edit inappropriate, and also direct new users towards the sandbox. They can also be used to give a stern warning to a vandal when they've been previously warned. Thank you. Kiko4564 (talk) 22:12, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

We have a template for THIS crap??? (gaze up) Ealdgyth - Talk 22:22, 20 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oy vey. More content contributions, less templating the regulars, please. Dana boomer (talk) 00:31, 21 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 reviews: Nick-D looks at the death of Osama bin Laden Op-ed: Sturmvogel_66 presents his secrets of prolific contribution

This year's final is upon us. Our final eight, in order of last round's score, are:

1. Hawkeye7 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer who has contributed on topics of military history and physics, including a number of high-importance topics. Good articles have made up the bulk of his points, but he has also scored a great deal of bonus points. He has the second highest score overall so far, with more than 3000 points accumulated.
2. Casliber (submissions), another WikiCup veteran who reached the finals in 2012, 2011 and 2010. He writes on a variety of topics including botany, mycology and astronomy, and has claimed the highest or joint highest number of featured articles every round so far this year. He has the third highest score overall, with just under 3000 points accumulated.
3. Cwmhiraeth (submissions), 2012 WikiCup champion, who writes mostly on marine biology. She has also contributed to high-importance topics, seeing huge numbers of bonus points for high-importance featured and good articles. Previous rounds have seen her scoring the most bonus points, with scoring spread across did you knows, good articles and featured articles.
4. Sasata (submissions), a WikiCup veteran who finished in second place in 2012, and competed as early as 2009. He writes articles on biology, especially mycology, and has scored highly for a number of collaborations at featured article candidates.
5. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions), the winner of the 2010 competition. His contributions mostly concern Naval history, and he has scored a very large number of points for good articles and good article reviews in every round. He is the highest scorer overall this year, with over 3500 points in total.
6. Ealdgyth (submissions), who is competing in the WikiCup for the second time, though this will be her first time in the final. A regular at FAC, she is mostly interested in British medieval history, and has scored very highly for some top-importance featured articles on the topic.
7. Miyagawa (submissions), a finalist in 2012 and 2011. He writes on a broad variety of topics, with many of this year's points coming from good articles about Star Trek. Good articles make up the bulk of his points, and he had the most good articles back in round 2; he was also the highest scorer for DYK in rounds 1 and 2.
8. Adam Cuerden (submissions) has previously been involved with the WikiCup, but hasn't participated for a number of years. He scores mostly from restoration work leading to featured picture credits, but has also done some article writing and reviewing.

We say goodbye to eight great participants who did not qualify for the final: Piotrus (submissions), Figureskatingfan (submissions), ThaddeusB (submissions), Dana boomer (submissions), Status (submissions), Ed! (submissions), 12george1 (submissions), Calvin999 (submissions). Having made it to this stage is still an excellent achievement, and you can leave with your heads held high. We hope to see you all again next year. Signups are now open for the 2014 WikiCup, which will begin on 1 January. All Wikipedians, whatever their interest or level of experience, are warmly invited to participate in next year's competition.

This last month has seen some incredible contributions; for instance, Cwmhiraeth's Starfish and Ealdgyth's Battle of Hastings—two highly important, highly viewed pages—made it to featured article status. It would be all too easy to focus solely on these stunning achievements at the expense of those participants working in lower-scoring areas, when in fact all WikiCup participants are doing excellent work. A mention of everything done is impossible, but here are a few: Last round saw the completion of several good topics (on the 1958, 1959 and 1962 Atlantic hurricane seasons) to which 12george1 had contributed. Calvin999 saw "S&M" (song), on which he has been working for several years, through to featured article status on its tenth try. Figureskatingfan continued towards her goal of a broad featured/good topic on Maya Angelou, with two featured and four good articles. ThaddeusB contributed significantly to over 20 articles which appeared on the main page's "in the news" section. Adam Cuerden continued to restore a large number of historical images, resulting in over a dozen FP credits this round alone. The WikiCup is not just about top-importance featured articles, and the work of all of these users is worthy of commendation.

Finally, the usual notices: 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 reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 05:37, 29 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Horse (estimated annual readership: 2,485,000) to Good Article status, I hereby present you the Million Award. Congratulations on this rare accomplishment, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Half Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Cabbage (estimated annual readership: 547,000) and Malawi (estimated annual readership: 610,000) to Good Article status, and Lettuce (estimated annual readership: 564,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Quarter Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Thoroughbred (estimated annual readership: 312,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Quarter Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:51, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looking again at that thread on WT:GAN reminded me that I owe you quite a few of these! You're also welcome to display the following userboxes:

If I've made any error in this listing, please don't hesitate to correct it; if for any reason you don't feel you deserve it, please don't hesitate to remove it; if you know of any other editor who merits one of these awards, please don't hesitate to give it; if you yourself deserve another award from any of the three tiers, please don't hesitate to take it!

Thanks for this terrific body of work; it's amazing how many readers you've served with your contributions here. Cheers and thanks, -- Khazar2 (talk) 13:49, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for all of these! I think this award is a great idea to bring a bit more press to those editors who work on high-profile articles, whether they are history or pop culture. One tweak, though...horse is only a GA, not a FA. I've changed that above and am headed over to the main MA page to change it. Dana boomer (talk) 16:50, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the catch! -- Khazar2 (talk) 16:54, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Looks like I forgot to list it there entirely; this is still a work in progress. It's up now, though--thanks again for all your core contributions-- Khazar2 (talk) 17:05, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Apple, an article that you or your project may be interested in, has been nominated for an individual good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 23:11, 30 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Dear Dana boomer As a Wikipedian interested in African subjects and specifically Malawi, I would like you to be aware of the following two opportunities:

1. Wikimedia South Africa and WikiAfrica are organising an WikiIndaba for February 2014 – a continental meeting for Africa-based Wikipedians to get together, discuss challenges and drive the agenda for Wikipedia from Africa. If you support this initiative, then please sign up on this site: http://wikiindaba.net – we also want to hear what you want the Wiki Indaba to achieve. What are your expectations? What does it need to include? Who and what do you want to see happen at WikiIndaba? What is your area of interest? Languages? Data? Please share your ideas and thoughts on the Community Portal

2. WikiAfrica is looking for a Wikipedian in Residence from Malawi. This might be a position that you would consider. Or it could be the perfect opportunity for someone you know from Malawi, please spread the word! For more details, please look at this page: http://www.wikiafrica.net/wikipedian-in-residence-malawi

If you have any questions about either of the above, please contact isla on isla [at] wikiafrica [dot] net : Isla Haddow (talk)

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/67.184.212.160 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

--Wizardman 14:52, 10 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Did a quick CE of the grammar of Gas attack at Hulluch.Keith-264 (talk) 21:45, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I'm still seeing missing words, missing linking, improper punctuation, etc., though, on just a quick glance. It looks like you've done a great job on the article, just needs a bit more of a bump before it's B-class, IMO. Dana boomer (talk) 22:05, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It's kind of you to take the trouble. Any examples?Keith-264 (talk) 22:41, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mostly it's picky little things that would take more time to list than to do myself. I should have the time to take a run through later tonight and at least leave some example edits. Dana boomer (talk) 22:48, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a bit tired myself. No commas before "and" though. ;O)Keith-264 (talk) 22:57, 12 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I did a run through, fixing typos, punctuation, etc. I linked quite a few things, but more of the armament stuff may need linking - not sure on MILHIST protocols for that. I also left a couple of hidden comments in spots where I think more info would be useful. Feel free to toss these when you've read them if you wish, they're just my suggestions and it was easier to put them there then start a new section on the talk page. At this point, I would ask for a new assessment on the main MILHIST assessment page, as I may be considered too involved to do a new assessment. Are you considering taking this article to GAN? Dana boomer (talk) 00:39, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Your fresh pair of eyes has been very helpful, I've been writing Great War history for so long that everything is familiar and I've obviously overlooked lots of links. I haven't bothered with any classification above B (except for Messines 1917) as I've been concentrating in filling gaps, I only had a dash at Hulluch because I've been procrastinating over Delville Wood. ;O)Keith-264 (talk) 08:16, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No problem, it was an interesting article to read! Feel free to drop me a note any time you need a fresh pair of eyes, Dana boomer (talk) 12:40, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It passed the B class review, thanks to your work.Keith-264 (talk) 07:37, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dana, I think cabbage is pretty close to FA quality. I plan to do a few hours of work on it this weekend when I'm at the library, but I don't expect any major changes. Would you be amenable to putting it in the FAC queue next week? Sasata (talk) 16:14, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yup, that's fine with me. I'll take a run through it this weekend, as well, to make any last minute changes. Drop it at FAC whenever you're ready! Dana boomer (talk) 17:22, 13 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I'm not stepping on any toes with my latest reference tweaks. There are still some minor referencing inconsistencies that need to ironed out for FAC:

• ending period after short citations or not?
• when source has two authors, should they be separated by "and" or just by a comma? (see e.g. cited literature list)
• et al. italicized or not?
• author initials spaced or not?
• date format for accessdates? different or same date format for citations dates?

I have no strong feelings about any of these, but bring it up here in case you do :) If you don't, I'm happy to just go ahead and make the formatting consistent. I don't think I have any more content additions to make, so it's just final copyediting now. Would you mind being the lead nom at FAC (you did the bulk of the content work). Sasata (talk) 18:20, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't have any really strong feelings on any of the above. Usually, I 1) have no periods after short citations, 2) use "and" to separate to authors, 3) don't italicize et. al., 4) space author initials, 5) use yyyy-mm-dd for access dates and month day, year for citation dates. However, if there are any of these that have mostly another type of formatting and its easier to use that, go for it. I will try to take a final copyediting run this evening (probably fairly late), and could then nominate it for FAC, if you feel that you'll be done with your final checks at that point? I don't mind being the lead nom at FAC. Dana boomer (talk) 18:38, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I hope to be done the final checks later today (although it depends on how busy things get here ...), then it's GTG when you are! Sasata (talk) 20:27, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Ok done! I think we can handle anything that might come up @ FAC. Sasata (talk) 16:14, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome! I took another run through the article and just ended up tweaking a couple of things. I've now nominated for FAC - cross your fingers :) Dana boomer (talk) 17:12, 19 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The more I dig around trying to find info to address Indopug's oppose, the more I'm convinced that the article currently has a pretty good balance based on the sources we've used. Most of the English-language literature is Euro/North America-centric, and I haven't been able to find anything specific to China that isn't actually about the Chinese cabbage. I've added a few mentions of India in the text. Regarding how it got there, there doesn't seem to be much more known than we already have in the text ("Cabbages spread from Europe into Mesopotamia and Egypt, and later followed trade routes throughout Asia and the Americas.") Is there anything you want to add or check out before I/you reply to Indopug? Sasata (talk) 16:13, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did quite a bit of digging when I was first putting the article together, and my conclusion was also that most of the "cabbage" grown/used in China is Chinese cabbage. This is made even more confusing by the FAO conflating multiple brassicas in their production data. From all of the source material I can find, true cabbage is mostly used (and has traditionally been used) in Europe/Russia/N. America. I like your additions, thanks for taking the time to dig through the source material again. Dana boomer (talk) 18:45, 24 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Can we substitute all instances of "fresh market" (currently 4) with "market", or is there some distinction I'm missing? Sasata (talk) 05:55, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
• How do you feel about cutting the final two sentences of "Taxonomy and etymology" to help address Quadell's balance concern? I'm not sure a 17th-19th century use of the word is important enough to include here (especially since, looking at the source, there's several other obscureish meanings that we haven't included). I always thought Cabbagetown was so named because the early Irish immigrants planted cabbage on their front lawns (corroborated here, for example, although not a RS). The alternative to trimming would be to expand the slang uses and make a subsection for it. Sasata (talk) 06:10, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• Thank you so much for doing most of the work so far on the FAC comments. I will try to get to addressing some of the remaining ones this afternoon. I think we can substitute "market" for "fresh market", it just sounds a little odd to my ears, but as far as I know there's no distinction. I have no opposition to trimming the slang usages...IIRC, I just mostly found references for stuff that was already in the article when I began working on it. Dana boomer (talk) 11:34, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• LOL, Sasata, every time I come online to work on the article, you're already in there :) Let me know if there is anything specific that you would like me to do...it seems that you're taking care of everything. I know I said I would be the lead nom, and expected to be doing the heavy lifting... (Don't get me wrong, I'm definitely not complaining, just wanting to make sure that I'm not leaving you feeling like you're working alone on this.) Dana boomer (talk) 23:31, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

• That's quite alright, this is a part of Wikipedia I enjoy ... quietly improving articles guided by excellent feedback from others! I'm working on expanding the history section (found this which has some old texts that have interesting tidbits), and later I'll see if there's anything good to add to medicinal properties. Please feel free to work on all the other points! Sasata (talk) 23:40, 27 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Success! Nice to work with you Dana, and let me know if you have a hankering to collaborate on another high-importance crop article sometime in the future (perhaps next year's WikiCup?). Sasata (talk) 05:42, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Yay! (And congrats on Pinniped as well - two high value articles promoted in the same day is awesome!) More collaborations for next year's wikicup sounds like a plan; there are still a ton of high importance crop articles in really poor condition, so we have a lot to choose from. Dana boomer (talk) 11:36, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done, you two! Hooray! Montanabw^(talk) 22:31, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Gday Dana boomer. Have you considered putting your name forward for this? I certainly think you have a lot of experience in the project and would be more than capable of doing the job. We currently only have 10 nominations and they close today so if you are interested pls have a look here: Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/September 2013. All the best. Anotherclown (talk) 04:31, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings from WikiProject Military history! As a member of the project, you are invited to take part in our annual project coordinator election, which will determine our coordinators for the next twelve months. If you wish to cast a vote, please do so on the election page by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September! Kirill ^[talk] 18:11, 16 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 reviews: Nick-D looks at the American Civil War

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Thetruthonly is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

Such a small one, yet such a pain to get through. Glad it's done. Wizardman 03:03, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Dana boomer- Should you have any inclination to review something off the beaten path, any comments or feedback (positive or negative) would be welcome. Thanks-Godot13 (talk) 01:41, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason the username linking there didn't trigger a notification for me, so just wanted to be sure you were aware of Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Ebionites_3/Workshop#FAR_guidelines_should_be_enforced. Nikkimaria (talk) 19:53, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Huh, I wasn't automatically notified either...wonder if it has something to do with the linking template that was used? Anyway, thanks for the note, I was not aware of that aspect of the case and will keep an eye on it. Dana boomer (talk) 21:02, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

In 30 days, we will know the identity of our 2013 WikiCup champion. Cwmhiraeth (submissions) currently leads; if that lead is held, she will become the first person to have won the WikiCup twice. Sasata (submissions), Hawkeye7 (submissions)—who has never participated in the competition before—and Casliber (submissions) follow. The majority of points in this round have come from a mix of good articles and bonus points. This final round is seeing contributions to a number of highly important topics; recent submissions include Phoenix (constellation) (FA by Casliber), Ernest Lawrence (GA by Hawkeye7), Pinniped, and red fox (both GAs by Sasata).

The did you know (DYK) eligibility criteria have recently changed, meaning that newly passed good articles are accepted as "new" for did you know purposes. However, in the interests of not changing the WikiCup rules mid-competition, please note that only articles eligible for DYK under the old system (that is, newly created articles or 5x expansions) will be eligible for points in this year's WikiCup. We do, however, have time to discuss how this new system will work for next year's competition; a discussion will be opened in due course. On that note, thoughts are welcome on changes you'd like to see for next year. What worked? What didn't work? What would you like to see more of? What would you like to see less of? All Wikipedians, new or old, are also warmly invited to sign up for the 2014 WikiCup.

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 reduce 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. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:59, 1 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Newfoundland pony 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) 05:11, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Sable Island horse 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 14:51, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Sable Island horse you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Sable Island horse for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 22:22, 4 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Could you possibly close this CFD[1]? The category was deleted per G4 by another administrator but that administrator felt he couldn't close the CFD because of a possible COI....William 19:03, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Dana boomer (talk) 19:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks!...William 20:05, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I suggested American Cream Draft for TFA, as PumpkinSky had proposed, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 21:59, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know where he proposed it, and I think having articles on the front page is a PITA, but I won't oppose, as it has to happen sometime. Dana boomer (talk) 22:48, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I probably mentioned it to PSky at WP:QAI, where Gerda has been working on having articles suitable for TFA pre-prepped for noms, so if it runs, I'll also help babysit. Montanabw^(talk) 04:40, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Mvto for the barnstar and a general toast to a lack of drama :). Have a good one! -Uyvsdi (talk) 17:06, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Newfoundland pony you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Newfoundland pony for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sturmvogel 66 -- Sturmvogel 66 (talk) 18:52, 6 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Namib Desert Horse, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Great Escarpment (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article 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) 11:22, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With all the GANs you are putting up, if you need what will probably be an easy review, note Talk:History of Chincoteague, Virginia/GA1. Montanabw^(talk) 03:05, 10 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

With the backlog at GAN, I've been trying to work on some of the old nominations, unless new ones are obvious quick fails. I did a bit of cleanup in the Places category, though, so the above article has moved a couple places closer to the top :) Looks like a nice article, as I glanced through it...nice for Chincoteague Pony to have a companion!

Wehwalt has a GAN reviewer for History of Chincoteague, but I'm about to put Homer Davenport up for PR with a possible notion of going straight to FAC with it, depending on outcome. Want to pop over and take a peek? (Another Arabian horse breeder article about someone famous outside the horse world as well). Montanabw^(talk) 22:33, 14 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I took a run through and left some comments on the talk page. PR is pretty dead these days, unfortunately, so I still prefer GAN, but whatever floats your boat. Dana boomer (talk) 00:33, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wehwalt has History of Chincoteague at GAN and I'm not sure if he can do two at once. He's also thinking this one could go straight to FAC, bypassing GAN. (Didn't know we could do this, but I did it with Oxbow (horse), and it was less of a hassle than I thought). Montanabw^(talk) 03:31, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Cabbage to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. It's a crying shame that the article couldn't find room for the use of the cabbage as a boobyprize on Crackerjack but perhaps that needs to wait until someone writes Cabbages in popular culture... or perhaps I'm just showing my age! Bencherlite^Talk 10:18, 15 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I like cabbage much more than sorrow, thank you! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:38, 16 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed every issue you've outlined, If you can now take another look at it I'd appreciate it. Grammarxxx ^{(What'd I do this time?)} 23:10, 20 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Canadian horse 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 Sasata -- Sasata (talk) 16:40, 21 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 reviews: Nick-D looks Austro-Hungarian battleships of World War I Op-ed: Advice on reviewing Featured and A-Class articles

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Namib Desert Horse 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 FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 17:41, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Half Million Award
		For your contributions to bring Cabbage (estimated annual readership: 516,000) to Featured Article status, I hereby present you the Half Million Award. Congratulations, and thanks for all you do for Wikipedia's readers! -- Khazar2 (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Million Award is a new initiative to recognize the editors of Wikipedia's most-read content; you can read more about the award and its possible tiers (Quarter Million Award, Half Million Award, and Million Award) at Wikipedia:Million Award. You're also welcome to display this userbox:

Thanks as always for your terrific contributions, Dana-- Khazar2 (talk) 18:23, 27 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Canadian horse you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Canadian horse for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Sasata -- Sasata (talk) 16:43, 30 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The WikiCup is over for another year! Our champion, for the second year running, is Cwmhiraeth (submissions). Our final nine were as follows:

1. Cwmhiraeth (submissions)
2. Hawkeye7 (submissions)
3. Sasata (submissions)
4. Sturmvogel_66 (submissions)
5. Casliber (submissions)
6. Adam Cuerden (submissions)
7. Miyagawa (submissions)
8. Piotrus (submissions)
9. Ealdgyth (submissions)

All those who reached the final win prizes, and prizes will also be going to the following participants:

• Casliber (submissions) wins the FA prize, for four featured articles in round 4, worth 400 points.
• Sturmvogel_66 (submissions) wins the GA prize, for 20 good articles in round 3, worth 600 points.
• Another Believer (submissions) wins the FL prize, for four featured lists in round 2, worth 180 points.
• Adam Cuerden (submissions) wins the FP prize, for 23 featured pictures in round 5, worth 805 point.
• Sven Manguard (submissions) wins the FPo prize, for 2 featured portals in round 3, worth 70 points.
• Hawkeye7 (submissions) wins the topic prize, for a 23-article featured topic in round 5, worth 230 points.
• Cwmhiraeth (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 79 did you know articles in round 5, worth 570 points.
• ThaddeusB (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 23 in the news articles in round 4, worth 270 points.
• Ed! (submissions) wins the GAR prize, for 24 good article reviews in round 1, worth 96 points.
• The judges are awarding the Oddball Barnstar to The C of E (submissions), for some curious contributions in earlier rounds.
• Finally, the judges are awarding Cwmhiraeth (submissions) the Geography Barnstar for her work on sea, now a featured article. This top-importance article was the highest-scoring this year; when it was promoted to FA status, Cwmhiraeth could claim 720 points.

Prizes will be handed out in the coming weeks. Please be patient!

Congratulations to everyone who has been successful in this year's WikiCup, whether you made it to the final rounds or not, and a particular congratulations to the newcomers to the WikiCup who have achieved this year. Thanks to all who have taken part and helped out with the competition. While it has been an excellent year, errors have opened up the judges' eyes to the need for a third judge, and it is with pleasure that we announce that experienced WikiCup participant Miyagawa will be acting as a judge from now on. We hope you will all join us in welcoming him to the team.

Next year's competition begins on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; it is open to all Wikipedians, new and old. Brainstorming and discussion remains open for how next year's competition will work, and straw polls will be opened by the judges soon. Those interested in friendly competition may also like to keep an eye on the stub contest, being organised by Casliber. The WikiCup judges will be back in touch over the coming months, and we hope to see you all in the 2014 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:38, 1 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Given the generally negative reaction to this article that I titled, I wanted to apologize in case you felt it was a negative comment on the hard work you put into the article. Regards, Ed ^{[talk] [majestic titan]} 21:07, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I thought the headline was funny... Guess I was in the minority, given the comments. Maybe I'll go take Crisco's suggestion to get Brussels sprout up to FA so that we can terrorize schoolchildren with that, too. Dana boomer (talk) 21:11, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I was never threatened with cabbage as a child, personally, my nemesis was canned spinach! LOL! Montanabw^(talk) 09:49, 3 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The article Namib Desert Horse you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Namib Desert Horse for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of FunkMonk -- FunkMonk (talk) 21:42, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a look. I did a bit of searching last night and it looks like those last few will be tough. Since you've tackled so much of it already you'd probably know better than I what remaining diffs are ok and what are not. As for a bigger cleanup, now that SCV/CP are in good shape for once I'm good for doing another drive, the question would just be which one. The ones I know a couple people are interested in are relatively small and don't really need a drive. We could always just do Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/20091230, since that's the oldest and many of the contribs are ok (any offline we can agf on that one), it just needs the fine-tuning since sentence here and there are ripped from allmusic. Wizardman 16:12, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

As an addendum, I know Dianna has been working on Racepacket's CCI. The three of us combined could probably clean that one in a week or two if you're up for that. Wizardman 16:15, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The Racepacket CCI looks like it could be done relatively quickly, if there are three of us working on it. I'm fairly well stuck on the last few articles in the Virago CCI, so I pinged MRG in on it. I'll keep plugging along on that one too, though. Dana boomer (talk) 20:07, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Dana. I'm just wondering if you can close the Our Friends in the North FAR since everything has been fixed up and looks to be up to the current FA standard. GamerPro64 21:47, 16 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

		The Copyright Cleanup Barnstar
		For flagging away at CCI when there are more fun and less frustrating tasks to do and keeping the copyright issues from swallowing the project. Moonriddengirl (talk) 01:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Virago250 is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

If you guys decide to collaborate on one, let me know - I'm in. :) That said, I'm going to try to help keep CP from backlogging again! --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 01:45, 17 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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 reviews: Hawkeye7 looks at US industry in World War II Op-ed: AustralianRupert offers a soldier's perspective on editing Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Contributor copyright investigations/Imtitanium is now complete. Thank you for your assistance in the evaluation of this CCI.

If only a magic fairy could make them ALL go away.... --Moonriddengirl ^(talk) 12:12, 26 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! A GAN Backlog Drive will begin in less than 4 days! In past Backlog Drives, the goal was to reduce the backlog of Good article nominations. In the upcoming drive, another goal will be added - raising as much money as we can for the Wikimedia Foundation. How will this work? Well, its pretty simple. Any user interested in donating can submit a pledge at the Backlog Drive page (linked above). The pledge should mention the amount of money the user is willing to donate per review. For example, if a user pledges 5 cents per review and 100 nominations are reviewed, the total donation amount is $5.00. At the time this message was sent out, two users have submitted pledges for a total of 8 cents per review. All pledges, no matter how much money, are greatly appreciated. Also, in no way is this saying you must make a pledge. If you have any questions, feel free to contact me or leave a message on the Backlog Drive talk page. And remember, there are less than 4 days before the drive starts!--EdwardsBot (talk) 03:08, 27 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]