User talk:Peacemaker67/Archive 18

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Peacemaker67. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Archive 15

Archive 16

Archive 17

Archive 18

Archive 19

Archive 20

→

Archive 25

Thank for the Yugoslav torpedo boat T3 with an interesting history! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:57, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:58, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

The article Raymond Leane 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:Raymond Leane for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Hawkeye7 -- Hawkeye7 (talk) 23:01, 23 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Jørgen Jensen (VC) 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 Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 10:01, 25 August 2017 (UTC)

The article Jørgen Jensen (VC) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Jørgen Jensen (VC) 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 Vanamonde93 -- Vanamonde93 (talk) 13:02, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

• Hello Peacemaker67, just wanted to let you know that I completed review of DYK nomination Jørgen Jensen (soldier) and have passed it. Cheers, Arun Kumar SINGH (Talk) 14:23, 27 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks AKS.9955! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:00, 28 August 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67,

Our system generated a list of potential new editors for your project. They may be interested in collaborating with your project members to on your project's articles. As you will notice, the list contains both experienced editors and newcomers. Both are valuable for Wikipedia and your project. Please go ahead and introduce your project to them, and point them to some project tasks to start with. We also provide a template invitation message to make it easier to contact the potential new editors. Just click the invite link to write the invitation message.

We'd appreciate it if you could fill the survey to let us know what you think about our recommendations so we can improve our system.

Username	Why we recommend this editor	First Edit Date	Total Edits in ENWP	Recent Activity Level	Invite	Survey
Steveottoponnary (talk · contribs)	Steveottoponnary just joined Wikipedia and made their first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Shining Path. This is an indication that they might be interested in working on your project. Please welcome Wikipedia newbies!	2017-8-23	5	New Editor	invite	survey
Hh1718 (talk · contribs)	Hh1718 just joined Wikipedia and made their first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Ignacio Hidalgo de Cisneros. This is an indication that they might be interested in working on your project. Please welcome Wikipedia newbies!	2017-8-22	44	New Editor	invite	survey
Grafton Eliason (talk · contribs)	Grafton Eliason just joined Wikipedia and made their first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Battle of Jericho. This is an indication that they might be interested in working on your project. Please welcome Wikipedia newbies!	2017-8-20	3	New Editor	invite	survey
Worm of Caterham (talk · contribs)	Worm of Caterham just joined Wikipedia and made their first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Peel tower. This is an indication that they might be interested in working on your project. Please welcome Wikipedia newbies!	2017-8-22	1	New Editor	invite	survey
Zwerubae (talk · contribs)	Zwerubae made 232 our of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project. If you invite them to your project, they will have the opportunity to contribute more!	2014-10-18	822	Active	invite	survey
CobraDragoon (talk · contribs)	CobraDragoon made 123 our of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project. If you invite them to your project, they will have the opportunity to contribute more!	2007-1-25	2137	Active	invite	survey
Simbi Steele (talk · contribs)	Simbi Steele made 170 our of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project. If you invite them to your project, they will have the opportunity to contribute more!	2016-11-20	412	Active	invite	survey
G-13114 (talk · contribs)	G-13114's editing history suggests a strong match with your project. Most articles they have edited fall under the Category Society and People, and most of your project's articles also fall under these categories. Studies have found that editors with a stronger topic match with a project tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2010-9-4	11876	Very Active	invite	survey
Danlaycock (talk · contribs)	Danlaycock's editing history suggests a strong match with your project. Most articles they have edited fall under the Category Society and History, and most of your project's articles also fall under these categories. Studies have found that editors with a stronger topic match with a project tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2005-7-12	24812	Active	invite	survey
Caracal Rooikat (talk · contribs)	Caracal Rooikat's editing history suggests a strong match with your project. Most articles they have edited fall under the Category Society and History, and most of your project's articles also fall under these categories. Studies have found that editors with a stronger topic match with a project tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2015-1-5	5928	Very Active	invite	survey
JudeccaXIII (talk · contribs)	JudeccaXIII's editing history shows connections with your project members! They have posted multiple messages on the user talk pages of a number of your project members. Studies have found that editors with these kinds of connections to project members tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2014-7-6	6569	Very Active	invite	survey
Cpt.a.haddock (talk · contribs)	Cpt.a.haddock's editing history shows connections with your project members! They have posted multiple messages on the user talk pages of a number of your project members. Studies have found that editors with these kinds of connections to project members tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2012-4-13	12519	Very Active	invite	survey
Scaleshombre (talk · contribs)	Scaleshombre's editing history shows connections with your project members! They have posted multiple messages on the user talk pages of a number of your project members. Studies have found that editors with these kinds of connections to project members tend to edit more and stay longer in the project!	2009-3-21	1018	Active	invite	survey
CapLiber (talk · contribs)	CapLiber edited articles similar to articles your project members edited. For example, CapLiber and project member Paul Siebert (talk · contribs) edited 3 of the same articles in their most recent 500 edits. This suggests that CapLiber will be interested in editing your project's articles!	2013-3-28	651	Active	invite	survey
Jurryaany (talk · contribs)	Jurryaany edited articles similar to articles your project members edited. For example, Jurryaany and project member Fnlayson (talk · contribs) edited 19 of the same articles in their most recent 500 edits. This suggests that Jurryaany will be interested in editing your project's articles!	2009-10-20	1847	Very Active	invite	survey
Hibernian (talk · contribs)	Hibernian edited articles similar to articles your project members edited. For example, Hibernian and project member TheGerm (talk · contribs) edited 10 of the same articles in their most recent 500 edits. This suggests that Hibernian will be interested in editing your project's articles!	2005-11-6	21552	Active	invite	survey

Bobo.03 (talk) 13:35, 26 August 2017 (UTC)

G'day Bobo.03, this has been a useful exercise. I've now reviewed these and have invited those that seemed a good match and filled out the survey for all. I think in general the ones that edit Society and History are less likely to be real possibilities for Milhist than the other categories, but I'd want to go through this process a couple of more times before drawing any conclusions. Also, we've already had one join up, User:Zwerubae Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:32, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Thank you, Peacemaker67! It's good to know it's getting good reactions already :) Yes, I will send you another batch in two weeks maybe with some tweaks in the system. Bobo.03 (talk) 03:13, 29 August 2017 (UTC)

Round 4 of the WikiCup has ended and we move forward into the final round. In round 4, a total of 12 FAs, 3 FLs, 44 GAs, 3 FLs, 79 DYKs, 1 ITN and 42 GARs was achieved, with no FPs or FTs this time. Congratulations to Peacemaker67 on the Royal Yugoslav Navy Good Topic of 36 items, and the 12 featured articles achieved by Cas Liber (5), Vanamonde93 (3), Peacemaker67 (2), Adityavagarwal (1) and 12george1 (1). With a FA scoring 200 points, and bonus points available on top of this, FAs are likely to feature heavily in the final round. Meanwhile Yellow Evan, a typhoon specialist, was contributing 12 DYKs and 10 GAs, while Adityavagarwal and Freikorp topped the GAR list with 8 reviews each. As we enter the final round, we are down to eight contestants, and we would like to thank those of you who have been eliminated for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia. The lowest score needed to reach round 5 was 305, and I think we can expect a highly competitive final round.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. 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, and let the best man (or woman) win! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66 and Cwmhiraeth 06:25, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Lawrence Weathers 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 14:00, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

The article Lawrence Weathers 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:Lawrence Weathers for things which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 14:20, 1 September 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (August 2017).

Administrator changes

Nakon • Scott

Sverdrup • Thespian • Elockid • James086 • Ffirehorse • Celestianpower • Boing! said Zebedee

Guideline and policy news

• ACTRIAL, a research experiment that restricts article creation to autoconfirmed users, will begin on September 7. It will run for six months. You can learn more about the research specifics at meta:Research:Autoconfirmed article creation trial, while Wikipedia talk:Autoconfirmed article creation trial is probably the best venue for general discussion.
• Following an RfC, WP:G13 speedy deletion criterion now applies to any page in the draftspace that has not been edited in six months. There is a bot-generated report, updated daily, to help identify potentially qualifying drafts that have not been submitted through articles for creation.

Technical news

• You will now get a notification when someone tries to log in to your account and fails. If they try from a device that has logged into your account before, you will be notified after five failed attempts. You can also set in your preferences to get an email when someone logs in to your account from a new device or IP address, which may be encouraged for admins and accounts with sensitive permissions.
• Syntax highlighting is now available as a beta feature (more info). This may assist administrators and template editors when dealing with intricate syntax of high-risk templates and system messages.
• In your notification preferences, you can now block specific users from pinging you. This functionality will soon be available for Special:EmailUser as well.

Arbitration

• Applications for CheckUser and Oversight are being accepted by the Arbitration Committee until September 12. Community discussion of the candidates will begin on September 18.

---

The article Lawrence Weathers you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Lawrence Weathers 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 Freikorp -- Freikorp (talk) 05:41, 2 September 2017 (UTC)

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 and Hawkeye7 look at two recent releases Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on ANZACs in the Third Ypres Offensive Timeline: This month in World War I

Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67,

Thank you for participating our study! I have improved our system based on the feedbacks of our study participants last time. How do you think of those recommended editors so far?

Currently, I am preparing the second batch of recommendations, and will be sending it out in the next couple days. Just to check in with you, and make sure that you'd like to see the next batch. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 16:40, 12 September 2017 (UTC)

G'day Bobo.03. Yes please. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:11, 13 September 2017 (UTC)

Hello,

Beginning in September 2017, the Wikimedia Foundation Anti-harassment tool team will be conducting a survey to gauge how well tools, training, and information exists to assist English Wikipedia administrators in recognizing and mitigating things like sockpuppetry, vandalism, and harassment.

The survey should only take 5 minutes, and your individual response will not be made public. This survey will be integral for our team to determine how to better support administrators.

To take the survey sign up here and we will send you a link to the form.

We really appreciate your input!

Please let us know if you wish to opt-out of all massmessage mailings from the Anti-harassment tools team.

For the Anti-harassment tools team, SPoore (WMF), Community Advocate, Community health initiative (talk) 20:56, 14 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67,

We made some changes and improvement in our system, and generated a second batch of recommendations for WPVG. We'd appreciate it if you could fill the survey to let us know what you think about our recommendations so we can improve our system.

Username	Why we recommend this editor	First Edit Date	Total Edits in ENWP	Recent Activity Level	Invite	Survey
Scullybully1 (talk · contribs)	Scullybully1 just joined Wikipedia and made the first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Light Tank Mk VII Tetrarch.	2017-9-14	1	New Editor	invite	survey
Sonic beast (talk · contribs)	Sonic beast just joined Wikipedia and made the first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Zheng He.	2017-9-11	4	New Editor	invite	survey
RaviR (talk · contribs)	RaviR just joined Wikipedia and made the first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Agra Fort.	2017-9-10	4	New Editor	invite	survey
PierreVan (talk · contribs)	PierreVan just joined Wikipedia and made the first edit on an article within the scope of your project, Article:Pierre van Ryneveld.	2017-9-13	2	New Editor	invite	survey
Darthkenobi0 (talk · contribs)	Darthkenobi0 made 77 out of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project.	2010-5-24	606	Very Active	invite	survey
MonsieurET (talk · contribs)	MonsieurET made 49 out of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project.	2006-1-23	2132	Active	invite	survey
YahwehSaves (talk · contribs)	YahwehSaves made 232 out of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project.	2011-5-16	7700	Active	invite	survey
Stumink (talk · contribs)	Stumink made 51 out of their most recent 500 edits to articles within the scope of your project.	2012-4-3	3337	Active	invite	survey
Qmbv (talk · contribs)	Qmbv edited articles similar to articles your project members edited. For example, Qmbv and you project member Sodacan (talk · contribs) edited 9 of the same articles in their most recent 500 edits.	2017-7-26	191	Active	invite	survey
Abductive (talk · contribs)	Abductive edited articles similar to articles your project members edited. For example, Abductive and you project member Phoenix7777 (talk · contribs) edited 8 of the same articles in their most recent 500 edits.	2009-5-19	28552	Very Active	invite	survey

Bobo.03 (talk) 15:32, 17 September 2017 (UTC)

Hi, I am new here and wondering if you can clarify situation on Op. Storm? Here is the chronology: 1) I modified the page with relevant sources (both clear quote primary source and the source already used in the same page), all of a sudden there is 3 IPs reverting it without any explanation (or lying, something like "unqouted sources" or similar). So, there is 3to1 fight, me being accused. I elaborate, I get accused. They erase legitimate changes without explanation. 2) I am warned to go to discussion to talk page (although my explanation is clear and supported, and their reaction is not). OK, I go to the talk page, I elaborate. No one replies, my changes are again removed and I end up being suspended. Absolutely no ground for reverting page given. 3) Now, it already seems suspicious. My changes are small, but extremely relevant. You see, article is much better than before, but still in many places between the lines tries to be biased. For example, there is and will be never ending fight whether it was an ethnic cleansing or not. So, we will never agree. However, the article qoutes 4 people saying "it was" and 1 person saying "it wasn't". Out of the 4 people saying "it was", one is biased friend of Milošević who denies Srebrenica genocide, which should be more than enough to discredit him in any normal conversation. So, this is obvious bias and should be deleted. And then, I become suspicious, because there seems to be organised removal of my modifications with false accusations, but not talking about the subject. So, just theoretically, of course, the plan could be like this - I am only 1, so if I revert it, I get a warning - it is 5 of them, so when somebody reverts it twice, the new one jumps in.

I am not mad, just sorry, and you seem like someone trying to be objective, so I would like to hear it from you. Thanks

Alex Shih^Talk 00:02, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Greetings from the Military history WikiProject! Elections for the Military history WikiProject Coordinators are currently underway. As a member of the WikiProject you are cordially invited to take part by casting your vote(s) for the candidates on the election page. This year's election will conclude at 23:59 UTC 29 September. Thank you for your time. For the current tranche of Coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:39, 21 September 2017 (UTC)

Firstly, sorry to bother you with such a minor thing but I'm just having some trouble with something.

I am already a part of the military history task force as a whole, however I am wanting to join the German military history task force as well. I went to add my name to the list on that particular post but I could not find the place to do it.

I would very much appreciate it if you could either get back to me on how to add myself or add me to it yourself

Thanks DiePanzerJager (talk) 23:43, 22 September 2017 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the Kragujevac massacre article has been scheduled as today's featured article for 21 October 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 21, 2017. Thanks! Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 16:24, 24 September 2017 (UTC)

		The Military history A-Class Medal with Diamonds
		I hearby award you this A-class Medal with Diamonds, for your work on Maurice Wilder-Neligan, Bill McCann, and Raymond Leane, promoted between August and September 2017. For the coordinators, AustralianRupert (talk) 02:32, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Rupert! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:33, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

In recognition of your election as one of the Military History Project's Co-ordinators, please accept these Co-ordinator's stars. Thank you for your ongoing efforts in support of the project. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 03:33, 30 September 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (September 2017).

Administrator changes

Boing! said Zebedee • Ansh666 • Ad Orientem

Tonywalton • AmiDaniel • Silence • BanyanTree • Magioladitis • Vanamonde93 • Mr.Z-man • Jdavidb • Jakec • Ram-Man • Yelyos • Kurt Shaped Box

Guideline and policy news

• Following a successful proposal to create it, a new user right called "edit filter helper" is now assignable and revocable by administrators. The right allows non-administrators to view the details of private edit filters, but not to edit them.
• Following a discussion about mass-application of ECP and how the need for logging and other details of an evolving consensus may have been missed by some administrators, a rough guide to extended confirmed protection has been written. This information page describes how the extended-confirmed aspects of the protection policy are currently being applied by administrators.

Technical news

• You can now search for IP ranges at Special:Contributions. Some log pages and Special:DeletedContributions are not yet supported. Wildcards (e.g. 192.168.0.*) are also not supported, but the popular contribsrange gadget will continue to work.

Arbitration

• Community consultation on the 2017 candidates for CheckUser and Oversight has concluded. The Arbitration Committee will appoint successful candidates by October 11.
• A request for comment is open regarding the structure, rules, and procedures of the December 2017 Arbitration Committee election, and how to resolve any issues not covered by existing rules.

---

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of 26 Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period Jul to Sep 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. AustralianRupert (talk) 09:14, 3 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker,

Congrats you are selected as a coordinator by MLHIST! I just want to report you the results of the preliminary analysis I have done on the impact of recruitment on editors in our first batch study. The results are very promising! I compare the number of edits those editors made before the recruitment in two weeks and the edits after the recruitment in two weeks, and find that their edits increased by 73% on articles within the project on average, while the number of edits of editors who were in the control group (editors who were also recommended by our system, but were not shown to any organizer nor recruited) decreased by 42%. So thank you for your great help! But now, we only have 40 editors that were invited by our participants (small sample size). We'd be happy to continue providing recommendations for you if you'd like to continue. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 00:43, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

That's very interesting data, Bobo.03! I certainly would like to continue receiving recommendations. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:51, 2 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker, I am writing a post for the Signpost to publicize our study and draw more attention from our community. I wonder if I can get a quote from you as a support? Please see the post I wrote. Thanks! Bobo.03 (talk) 20:59, 4 October 2017 (UTC)

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 and Hawkeye7 look at Australian involvement on the Western Front in 1918 and in post-war New Guinea Op-ed: TomStar81 on the October Revolution Timeline: This month in World War I

Hi Can you give Murder of Kylie Maybury a look? Thank you. Paul Benjamin Austin (talk) 20:26, 8 October 2017 (UTC)

G'day, what exactly were you wanting attention to? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article First Battle of Dernancourt 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 AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 04:01, 11 October 2017 (UTC)

The article First Battle of Dernancourt you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:First Battle of Dernancourt 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 AustralianRupert -- AustralianRupert (talk) 01:01, 13 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67 !

Recently i created an article which contains mainly info on the Kosovo War called Destruction of Albanian heritage in Kosovo. Writing it was hard as books were located all over Melbourne university libraries, stashed away in some cases in dust filled corners. Due to your great expertise in the area and as the topic is delicate and sensitive, any advice would be much appreciated on making the article much better, changes etc, due to some matters raised in the talkpage [1]. Best regards.Resnjari (talk) 06:17, 12 October 2017 (UTC)

G'day Resnjari. Good on you for working in what must be a pretty fraught area. My knowledge of Kosovo is pretty limited though, so I'm not sure I can add much. Adherence to NPOV is very difficult to achieve in such emotive areas. Good luck! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:56, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your message. I've already been watching your development of this article for some time - having seen your efforts in other areas in the past I'm thrilled to see some of your attention going to the Frontier Wars, a lot of our broader coverage being pretty woeful.

I think this is great, but a couple of pieces of very minor feedback:

• "This was largely a result of the laws governing the use of evidence from unsworn Aboriginal witnesses combined with settler solidarity." - I think it's important to clarify why they were unsworn: I know you have explained this fine deeper in the article, but it's a critical fact and that sentence in the lede implies that the witnesses perhaps could have been sworn.
• "Possibly in response to Brown's case, the Aboriginal Witnesses Act (1848) was subsequently amended to allow a person to be convicted on the sole testimony of an Aboriginal person." - is it known when that amendment happened?
• Getting peripheral now, but the paragraph on Clement Smith is a bit confusing about what he was trying to achieve with the speech/what his take on the massacre was

Apart from those tiny things, this is, as ever, brilliant. Always thrilled to see you getting into Australian stuff. The Drover's Wife (talk) 12:36, 14 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks The Drover's Wife. I've added a bit more to the lead by way of explanation, and cited and linked the two laws (the amendment was in July 1849, but I expect that it could not be applied retrospectively to Brown). I've also tried to explain the context of Smith's speech a bit more. Let me know what you think? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:28, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Looks great! The Drover's Wife (talk) 07:09, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello Peacemaker. It seems you may need to lock WWII in Yugoslavia again as the same person appearing with different IP addresses for the past six months continues to historically revise the page (and many others across Wikipedia). It's amazing how dedicated these ultra-nationalists are. 108.30.128.7 (talk) 22:47, 15 October 2017 (UTC)

It continues to be tiresome. Thanks, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:52, 16 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks for your military history invitation. I'm having a problem at Audie Murphy talk, can you take a visit there and see. I do not deserve this kind of abuse.... topic is Soldier's Medal. Its personal attack(s) on me whether they say so or not. Unfortunately, they don't really care about Murphy it seems. I do. Would like your imput about my changes for Murphy. Thought these were beneficial? YahwehSaves (talk) 05:46, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

No problem. Re: Audie Murphy, I've commented there. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:16, 18 October 2017 (UTC)

Hello! Your submission of First Battle of Dernancourt 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! Yoninah (talk) 23:02, 19 October 2017 (UTC)

Hey, kept slipping my mind but I wanted to thank you for the invite and welcome to Milhist. Haven't been too active in discussion but I love that such a group exists. Darthkenobi0||talk 04:01, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

No worries. No pressure to join in with anything in particular, it's just good for people to know we're around and we're happy to help if we can. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:44, 20 October 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for the excellent article "about a massacre of nearly 2,800 men and boys carried out by the German Army in the occupied territory of Serbia during WWII"! The topic is sickening, though. Peace. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 06:54, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! It is especially important that war crimes are covered well on WP, we must never forget these atrocities. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree. I just made an image for my alleged battleground, top of my talk ;) - Will MilHist some day reflect the battles on Wikipedia? I could help, have seen WP:AE, so have seen it all ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:14, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Sorry to do this to you just a month later but... This is to let you know that the Beograd-class destroyer article has been scheduled as today's featured article for November 20, 2017. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/November 20, 2017. Thanks! Ealdgyth - Talk 16:10, 21 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there,

I (a little while ago) signed up to GA review the Battle of Haldighati article for Milhist, and being a relatively new editor here, was unsure whether the article's rather troubled history would constitute an auto-fail per the guidelines. Apparently it's been the target of some revisionism attempts by Rajasthani nationalists. I was busy, and procrastinated for quite a while, but I needed help and turned to an experienced reviewer (you). What would be the proper course of action? Thanks very much, Herodotus (talk) 00:42, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

G'day HerodotusTheFraud. The disruptive editor seems to have backed off after warnings, no disruption for over a week, so I think you could proceed. It is always a hard call, as it is unfair to the article and nominator if one editor or a couple of editors are affecting the stability of an article which is under GAN review, but we still need enough stability to review it fairly. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:02, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

I agree, I thought it would be unfair on the editor if biased parties forced down the quality of the article. Thanks for your help; I will start with the review process in earnest. Best, Herodotus (talk) 03:43, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

No prob. Happy to help. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:23, 22 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Avenue Range Station massacre 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 Adityavagarwal -- Adityavagarwal (talk) 11:01, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

The article Avenue Range Station massacre you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Avenue Range Station massacre 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 Adityavagarwal -- Adityavagarwal (talk) 07:21, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Commissioner Government 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 Adityavagarwal -- Adityavagarwal (talk) 15:41, 26 October 2017 (UTC)

The article Commissioner Government you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Commissioner Government 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 Adityavagarwal -- Adityavagarwal (talk) 12:02, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Bobo.03 (talk) 16:01, 28 October 2017 (UTC)

Alex Shih (talk) 00:02, 29 October 2017 (UTC)

Hi!

'Service Battalions' of British regiments during WWI were the Kitchener's Army battalions, numbered in sequence after the existing Regular, Supplementary Reserve (Militia) and Territorial Force (TF) battalions. (The 'Long, Long Trail' website [2] is pretty good at making this all clear.) During the Second Boer War the Volunteer Force (Great Britain) had formed 'Service Companies' to augment the Regulars in theatre.

As for joining the Wipkiproject, I'm not much of a joiner, but I'll happily beaver away in my own little niche.

Cheers Rickfive (talk) 17:35, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

Thanks very much for the explainer. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:53, 30 October 2017 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (October 2017).

Administrator changes

Longhair • Megalibrarygirl • TonyBallioni • Vanamonde93

Allen3 • Eluchil404 • Arthur Rubin • Bencherlite

Technical news

• The Wikimedia Foundation's Anti-Harassment Tools team is creating an "Interaction Timeline" tool that intends to assist administrators in resolving user conduct disputes. Feedback on the concept may be posted on the talk page.
• A new function is now available to edit filter managers that will make it easier to look for multiple strings containing spoofed text.

Arbitration

• Eligible editors will be invited to submit candidate statements for the 2017 Arbitration Committee Elections starting on November 12 until November 21. Voting will begin on November 27 and last until December 10.
• Following a request for comment, Ritchie333, Yunshui and Ymblanter will serve as the Electoral Commission for the 2017 ArbCom Elections.

Obituaries

• The Wikipedia community has recently learned that Allen3 (William Allen Peckham) passed away on December 30, 2016, the same day as JohnCD. Allen began editing in 2005 and became an administrator that same year.

---

The final round of the 2017 WikiCup is over. Congratulations to the 2017 WikiCup top three finalists:

• First Place - Adityavagarwal (submissions)
• Second Place - Vanamonde (submissions)
• Third Place - Cas Liber (submissions)

In addition to recognizing the achievements of the top finishers and everyone who worked hard to make it to the final round, we also want to recognize those participants who were most productive in each of the WikiCup scoring categories:

• Featured Article – Cas Liber (actually a two-way tie with themselves for an astonishing five FAs in R2 and R4).
• Good Article – Adityavagarwal had 14 GAs promoted in R5.
• Featured List – Bloom6132 (submissions) and 1989 (submissions) both produced 2 FLs in R2
• Featured Pictures – SounderBruce (submissions) improved an image to FP status in R5, the only FP this year.
• Featured Topic – MPJ-DK (submissions) has the only FT of the Cup in R3.
• Good Topic – Four different editors created a GT in R2, R3 and R4.
• Did You Know – Adityavagarwal had 22 DYKs on the main page in R5.
• In The News – MBlaze Lightning (submissions) had 14 ITN on the main page in R2.
• Good Article Review – Krishna Chaitanya Velaga (submissions) completed 31 GARs in R1.

Over the course of the 2017 WikiCup the following content was added or improved on Wikipedia: 51 Featured Articles, 292 Good Articles, 18 Featured Lists, 1 Featured Picture, 1 Featured Topics, 4 Good Topics, around 400 Did You Knows, 75 In The News, and 442 Good Article Reviews. Thank you to all the competitors for your hard work and what you have done to improve Wikipedia.

Regarding the prize vouchers - @Adityavagarwal, Vanamonde93, Casliber, Bloom6132, 1989, and SounderBruce: please send Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) an email from the email address to which you would like your Amazon voucher sent. Please include your preference of global Amazon marketplace as well. We hope to have the electronic gift cards processed and sent within a week.

We will open up a discussion for comments on process and scoring in a few days. The 2018 WikiCup is just around the corner! Many thanks from all the judges. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email), Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email), and Godot13 (talk · contribs · email) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:41, 2 November 2017 (UTC)

Please, avoid personal attacks wrapped into warnings about possible violations of the Wikipedia rules. Civilty is a mandatory rule when talking to other Wikipedia users.--Taribuk (talk) 05:18, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

Nothing I said to you was uncivil. I told you your opinion about reliability is irrelevant, and warned you of the policy on edit-warring. End of. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:23, 3 November 2017 (UTC)

It seems that you are talking to a sock [3]. Funny how he accuses you of personal attacks while at the same time making personal attacks on other pages. 141.138.55.126 (talk) 00:36, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

I had wondered. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:37, 4 November 2017 (UTC)

An IP has made major changes to Chetniks (reverting changes made by a previous IP that you didn't seem to find needed reverting). I'd be grateful if you could step in to figure out how to solve the content dispute since I'm not that well versed on it. Alcherin (talk) 23:17, 6 November 2017 (UTC)

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: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on late 1917 naval warfare Timeline: This month in World War I

What is your take on the use of the Roman digits for "15th" in this case? Germans may have used thus, but looks odd in English.Axxxion (talk) 20:16, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Also, apropos the Russian Protective Corps (as you are the principal author of the current version): Is it reasonable to definitively assert that Boris Shteifon was killed rather than died?Axxxion (talk) 20:20, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

perhaps best reply on the relevant TalkPages, please.Axxxion (talk) 20:21, 8 November 2017 (UTC)

Alex Shih (talk) 00:03, 15 November 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for Beograd-class destroyer, "a classic example of the fates of World War II Yugoslav ships. The class consisted of three destroyers built for the Royal Yugoslav Navy in the lead-up to World War II. Two were captured when the Axis powers invaded in April 1941, but the other (Zagreb) was blown up by two officers who were killed in the explosions. The others were put into service by the Italians, who used them mainly on the North Africa convoys. One was lost in their hands, but the other was taken over by the Germans when the Italian surrendered in September 1943. It wasn't sunk until late in the war. In the late 1960s, a French film was made about the scuttling of Zagreb, and in the early 1970s the two officers who scuttled her were posthumously awarded the Order of the People's Hero by Yugoslav President Josip Broz Tito."! - I had a war memorial with a peace bell on the Main page, DYK? And a FAC open ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:29, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Thanks again Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 10:04, 20 November 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, not a bad article ... for a Croat. (heh heh heh)  :-D — Preceding unsigned comment added by 104.169.28.113 (talk) 19:32, 25 November 2017 (UTC)

wholesale reverts unconstructive, as I pointed out on Talk. The article is allowed for legitimate edits. I do not make any drastic changes, just add new info, sourced no worse than the rest. As you could already see in Russian Protective Corps, a hastily granted status of whatever to an article does not make it infallible, as that article contained some factual inaccuracies that contravened even the source cited. If you disagree with sth in my edits on merits, please point it out, but stop wholesale reverts.Axxxion (talk) 14:15, 27 November 2017 (UTC)

The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative (led by the Safety and Support and Anti-Harassment Tools team) is conducting a survey for en.wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with the Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works - which problems it deals with well, and which problems it struggles with.

The survey should take 10-20 minutes to answer, and your individual responses will not be made public. The survey is delivered through Google Forms. The privacy policy for the survey describes how and when Wikimedia collects, uses, and shares the information we receive from survey participants and can be found here:

• https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2017_AN/Incidents_Survey_Privacy_Statement

If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be mailed to you via Special:Emailuser.

• Sign up here to receive a link to a survey

Thank you on behalf of the Support & Safety and Anti-Harassment Tools Teams, Patrick Earley (WMF) talk 18:24, 1 December 2017 (UTC)

As we approach the end of the year, the Military History project is looking to recognise editors who have made a real difference. Each year we do this by bestowing two awards: the Military Historian of the Year and the Military History Newcomer of the Year. The co-ordinators invite all project members to get involved by nominating any editor they feel merits recognition for their contributions to the project. Nominations for both awards are open between 00:01 on 2 December 2017 and 23:59 on 15 December 2017. After this, a 14-day voting period will follow commencing at 00:01 on 16 December 2017. Nominations and voting will take place on the main project talkpage: here and here. Thank you for your time. For the co-ordinators, MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 08:35, 8 December 2017 (UTC)

Thank you for your recent review of the article. Regarding your comment about Meyer's WWII activities prior to 1944, the RS appear to be sparse; see for example this brief bio in Hart. I did fill the gap between summer of 1943 and 1944: Meyer was in France with Hitlerjugend: diff. Presumably, nothing interesting happened.

I also looked up the prior, mostly unsourced, narrative around Barbarossa (link to 2015 version). The article said that he was on convalescent leave from Oct 1941 to Jan 1942, and I was unable to verify his role in the capture of Mariupol. If you could share more feedback, or revisit the assessment, I would appreciate it. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:23, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

It is still very thin on operational details during the war. Is there a reason you haven't used "Hitler's Commanders: German Action in the Field 1939-1945" by James Lucas, which has a detailed profile of him including his early life and service history? Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:36, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

It's not a book I have ready access to. Meyer was a battalion / regimental commander until 1944 so treatment of his activities is not detailed in the books that I can access. In any case, I don't believe that B-class articles are required to be comprehensive. Hart, for example, finds a brief bio sufficient. K.e.coffman (talk) 02:41, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

What Hart thinks is sufficient info on Meyer in a book about a major Allied operation isn't necessarily what is sufficient on WP for a bio article, which at B-Class is "no obvious gaps". In my view there are obvious gaps. Of course, you are free to have someone else look it over, but I wouldn't class it as B as it stands. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:49, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks, I will resubmit for a second opinion. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:05, 10 December 2017 (UTC)

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: Recent external reviews Op-ed: TomStar81 on the Halifax Explosion of 1917 Timeline: This month in World War I

News and updates for administrators from the past month (November 2017).

Administrator changes

Joe Roe

JzG

Ericorbit • Perceval • Thingg • Tristanb • Violetriga

Guideline and policy news

• Following a request for comment, a new section has been added to the username policy which disallows usernames containing emoji, emoticons or otherwise "decorative" usernames, and usernames that use any non-language symbols. Administrators should discuss issues related to these types of usernames before blocking.

Technical news

• Wikimedians are now invited to vote on the proposals in the 2017 Community Wishlist Survey on Meta Wiki until 10 December 2017. In particular, there is a section of the survey regarding new tools for administrators and for anti-harassment.
• A new function is available to edit filter managers which can be used to store matches from regular expressions.

Arbitration

• Voting in the 2017 Arbitration Committee elections is open until Sunday 23:59, 10 December 2017 (UTC). There are 12 candidates running for 8 vacant seats.

Miscellaneous

• Over the last few months, several users have reported backlogs that require administrator attention at WP:ANI, with the most common backlogs showing up on WP:SPI, WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. It is requested that all administrators take some time during this month to help clear backlogs wherever possible. It should be noted that AIV reports are not always valid; however, they still need to be cleared, which may include needing to remind users on what qualifies as vandalism.
• The Wikimedia Foundation Community health initiative is conducting a survey for English Wikipedia contributors on their experience and satisfaction level with Administrator’s Noticeboard/Incidents. This survey will be integral to gathering information about how this noticeboard works (i.e. which problems it deals with well and which problems it struggles with). If you would like to take this survey, please sign up on this page, and a link for the survey will be emailed to you via Special:EmailUser.

---

Thank you for the iconic Hawker Hurricane in Yugoslav service! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:05, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:06, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

G'day, PM, I scratched something together for First Battle of Morlancourt today. It is by no means complete. If you are keen to add anything, please feel free. All the best. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 10:12, 13 December 2017 (UTC)

G'day Rupert. I will take a look once I've finished Second Dernancourt, which is taking longer than I thought it would. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:07, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Too easy, thanks. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 07:22, 15 December 2017 (UTC)

Hi Peacemaker67, On 8 Dec I undid (what looked like) spam added to Ian Johnson (cricketer) when that article was the featured article on main page. It was an external link and was added twice by an IP. Yesterday the same link was added to Hawker Hurricane in Yugoslav service by a different IP. I undid it. They copy a bona fide ref then paste it in prefaced by an external link. Should that ext link be added to a blacklist? Regards, JennyOz (talk) 04:25, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

This is to let you know that the August Meyszner article has been scheduled as today's featured article for January 24, 2018. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 24, 2018, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1100 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 16:34, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

		The Military history A-Class Medal with Diamonds
		On behalf of the WikiProject Military history coordinators, you are hereby awarded the Military history A-class Medal with Diamonds for your efforts in improving the First Battle of Dernancourt, Momčilo Đujić and Waterloo Bay massacre articles upto A-Class status. Regards, Parsecboy (talk) 12:31, 19 December 2017 (UTC)

Greetings,

"Military history" is one of the most important subjects when speak of sum of all human knowledge. To support contributors interested in the area over various language Wikipedias, we intend to form a user group. It also provides a platform to share the best practices between military historians, and various military related projects on Wikipedias. An initial discussion was has been done between the coordinators and members of WikiProject Military History on English Wikipedia. Now this discussion has been taken to Meta-Wiki. Contributors intrested in the area of military history are requested to share their feedback and give suggestions at Talk:Discussion to incubate a user group for Wikipedia Military Historians.

MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:30, 21 December 2017 (UTC)

	Wish you a Merry Christmas and a prosperous New Year 2018!
	A very Happy, Glorious, Prosperous Christmas and New Year! God bless!  — Adityavagarwal (talk) 17:01, 22 December 2017 (UTC)

		2017 Military Historian of the Year
		As voted by your peers within the Military history WikiProject, I hereby award you the Golden Wiki as the co-recipient of the 2017 Military Historian of the Year Award. Congratulations, and thank you for your efforts in 2017. AustralianRupert (talk) 01:58, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Rupert. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 03:59, 30 December 2017 (UTC)

		The WikiChevrons
		On behalf of the Milhist coordinators, you are hereby awarded the WikiChevrons for reviewing a total of 35 Milhist articles at PR, GAN, ACR or FAC during the period October to December 2017. Thank you for supporting Wikipedia's quality content processes. AustralianRupert (talk) 02:15, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks mate. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:16, 3 January 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (December 2017).

Administrator changes

Muboshgu

Anetode • Laser brain • Worm That Turned

None

Bureaucrat changes

Worm That Turned

Guideline and policy news

• A request for comment is in progress to determine whether the administrator policy should be amended to require disclosure of paid editing activity at WP:RFA and to prohibit the use of administrative tools as part of paid editing activity, with certain exceptions.

Technical news

• The 2017 Community Wishlist Survey results have been posted. The Community Tech team will investigate and address the top ten results.
• The Anti-Harassment Tools team is inviting comments on new blocking tools and improvements to existing blocking tools for development in early 2018. Feedback can be left on the discussion page or by email.

Arbitration

• Following the results of the 2017 election, the following editors have been (re)appointed to the Arbitration Committee: Alex Shih, BU Rob13, Callanecc, KrakatoaKatie, Opabinia regalis, Premeditated Chaos, RickinBaltimore, Worm That Turned.

---

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: Hawkeye7 looks at tropical medicine and Operation Market Garden Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on US Army doctrine in World War I Timeline: This month in World War I

Not sure if you got my ping, but please take a peak at my comment in the talk page regaurding the differentiation of puppets states and axis powers. I trust your views more on the subject matter. Much appreciated. OyMosby (talk) 02:46, 18 January 2018 (UTC)

This is to let you know that 250t-class torpedo boat has been scheduled as today's featured article for 1 February 2018. Please check that the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/February 1, 2018. Ealdgyth - Talk 15:17, 19 January 2018 (UTC)

"This article is about August Meyszner, a former gendarmerie officer and right-wing politician in Austria who travelled to Nazi Germany and joined the SS soon after Hitler's rise to power. After a series of police postings he was appointed by Heinrich Himmler as the head of the SS security and police organs in German-occupied Serbia, a position he held for two years. He was responsible for carrying out of numerous reprisal killings of civilians, the sending of tens of thousands of forced labourers to Germany and other occupied territories, and oversaw the killing of 8,000 Jewish women and children using a gas van. Sidelined in early 1944, he was captured by the Allies at the end of the war and extradited back to Yugoslavia, where he was tried and executed for war crimes. He has been described as one of Himmler's most brutal lieutenants." - Thank you reminding us! --Gerda Arendt (talk) 08:12, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Gerda! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:36, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

I edited "order police" to "regulatory police" simply because, as a native English speaker, I recognise that there is no such animal in the English language as "order police". I feel that "regulatory police" is simply a better translation but of course I bow to your better feelings in the matter. That's all. Thanks and best regards,

Bellroth

Bellroth 09:41, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thanks Bellroth, Brittanica renders it as "order police", so that's what we are going with at present. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 09:48, 24 January 2018 (UTC)

Thank you, you did it again ;) - "The 250t-class were torpedo boats built for the Austro-Hungarian Navy in the lead-up to and early stages of World War I. Almost all of them saw a fair bit of action during the war, but none were lost. They were divided among the Allied nations of Yugoslavia, Portugal, Romania and Greece after the war, with some surviving to see action in World War II. The last of them didn't go out of service until the early 1960s."! - Please watch mine tomorrow. ----Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:45, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks as always Gerda! Looking forward to seeing how many views yours gets. Regards, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:52, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi there, just letting you know that I've just nominated this article for FAC. Since your review I've cleaned it up a bit more, and tracked down a few of the more obscure sources (actually got a copy of the original conservation notes from the conservator). It would obviously be welcomed and appreciated if you would like to take another look at the article for the current review; whether or not you do so, however, thanks again for taking the time to help improve it with your GA review. --Usernameunique (talk) 07:46, 27 January 2018 (UTC)

No prob. I'll take a look soon. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 07:53, 1 February 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (January 2018).

Administrator changes

None

Blurpeace • Dana boomer • Deltabeignet • Denelson83 • Grandiose • Salvidrim! • Ymblanter

Guideline and policy news

• An RfC has closed with a consensus that candidates at WP:RFA must disclose whether they have ever edited for pay and that administrators may never use administrative tools as part of any paid editing activity, except when they are acting as a Wikipedian-in-Residence or when the payment is made by the Wikimedia Foundation or an affiliate of the WMF.
• Editors responding to threats of harm can now contact the Wikimedia Foundation's emergency address by using Special:EmailUser/Emergency. If you don't have email enabled on Wikipedia, directly contacting the emergency address using your own email client remains an option.

Technical news

• A tag will now be automatically applied to edits that blank a page, turn a page into a redirect, remove/replace almost all content in a page, undo an edit, or rollback an edit. These edits were previously denoted solely by automatic edit summaries.

Arbitration

• The Arbitration Committee has enacted a change to the discretionary sanctions procedure which requires administrators to add a standardized editnotice when placing page restrictions. Editors cannot be sanctioned for violations of page restrictions if this editnotice was not in place at the time of the violation.

---

Hi Peacemaker67,

Hope you are doing well! Thank you for using our tool, and giving us feedback for improvement. We've made some improvements, and are preparing to send another round of recommendations for your project. But before that, we are considering two possible factors to implement into our algorithms potentially, and wonder what's your opinion on them.

1. Small project promotion. An editor who has a wide range of subject interest can be recommended to multiple projects according to our current algorithms. When this happens, do you think it matters to make choices among those projects, i.e., should we prioritize on those smaller projects, just randomly choose one project, or do you have other thoughts?

2. Female editor promotion. Gender imbalance has been a long-term issue in Wikipedia which consequently caused the uncoverage of many female related topics. What do you think about the idea of promoting more female editors in the recommendation list? Bobo.03 (talk) 19:58, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

G'day, I think both ideas have merit, but particularly the second one. I am a bit concerned that some editors may have wide ranging interests but may not necessarily want to participate in many projects. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 22:38, 2 February 2018 (UTC)

Yeah, I agree. Do you think these two ideas worth implementing into the current system? Bobo.03 (talk) 19:07, 4 February 2018 (UTC)

I think so. Give it a run and see what results we get? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:37, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

Sounds good! I will collect all the feedback, and make a decision accordingly. Thank you! Bobo.03 (talk) 15:54, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

my understanding of the issue underlying this edit?Axxxion (talk) 14:20, 5 February 2018 (UTC)

looks fair enough to me. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:43, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. I'm sorry if this comes across as badgering, and please believe me that's not my intention. I'm just seeking clarification. The two sentences in your rationale seem to contradict each other. You first state that they (and I assume "they" means "Yeomanry" and "Yeomanry Cavalry") seem to be justifiably separate articles. This is what would in effect happen if the page is moved, resulting in one article for Yeomanry in general, and a second article for Yeomanry Cavalry focussed on the 19th century institution. Your second statement seems to say the opposite, that Yeomanry Cavalry should not exist as a separate article, and the subject matter should exist only in summary as part of a single Yeomanry article. Factotem (talk) 08:50, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

My point (perhaps poorly explained) is that you wouldn't move one to the other if both were justifiably separate articles. Which I consider they are. So, my view is that you should revert your edits to the original article so it reflects the original intent there (as an overview of Yeomanry), and create a new article for the Yeomanry Cavalry (containing much of what you have done with the original article). Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 11:48, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

Thanks. I'm perfectly happy with that solution, but now I have a problem. At the moment the page move request looks like it will be declined, so if I then restore the original Yeomanry article and move the work I've done on Yeomanry Cavalry to a new article, I will likely be accused of gaming the system, not dropping sticks, etc. Further complications are: "Yeomanry Cavalry" already exists as a disambig page; and there's a lot of page history that will be lost in any move that I, as a non-admin, am capable of doing. Are you able to advise how I might correctly go about achieving the split? Factotem (talk) 12:09, 3 February 2018 (UTC)

It is Yeoman that is a disambiguation page, not Yeomanry Cavalry. And Yeomanry Cavalry currently redirects to Yeomanry. For far as I can tell, all that has to be done is convert the Yeomanry Cavalry redirect page into an article page, and revert the conversion you did on the Yeomanry page so it goes back to having a more general scope. To avoid any accusations of gaming etc, I would just flag your intention on the talk page of Yeomanry, noting that you accept that the change of scope wasn't appropriate, and see if anyone objects to your course of action. If any admin-type stuff needs doing, let me know? Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:51, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

"Yeomanry Cavalry" got changed from a disambig to a redirect after I posted the page move request. I've already flagged my intention at the "Yeomanry" talk page and asked for the page move request to be withdrawn. I'll give it a week for comments. As I understood things, though, I believe it requires an admin to perform the actual move. I don't believe I can revert yeomanry back to its original state at all, and I don't believe it's correct simply to copy-paste its current state in one single edit over to "Yeomanry Cavalry" because the page history will be lost. Or have I mis-understood? Factotem (talk) 07:04, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

I've dropped a note to all who contributed to the page move discussion inviting them to comment on the new plan at the Yeomanry TP, and you are of course welcome to weigh in there if you wish. Factotem (talk) 23:15, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

as to whether we can (technically speaking) use in En WP this image : [4] , same in Ru : [5] ? Axxxion (talk) 23:28, 6 February 2018 (UTC)

we'd need to know the author (and their date of death), or if anonymous, the date of publication. Then we could see whether it was PD. Cheers, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 00:18, 7 February 2018 (UTC)

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 the Napoleonic Wars and Hawkeye7 on World War II Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on generalship in 1918 Timeline: This month in World War I

Anonymous IP user continues to make massive unsourced edits despite your input. How foes one deal with this? Or is it futile as a user will just use another IP?... OyMosby (talk) 16:58, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

As in WP:Administrators' noticeboard#Notice of possible vandalism, I would recommend at least semi-protecting these articles to counteract further disruptions.--Boczi (talk) 17:08, 12 February 2018 (UTC)

Hi. Per the discussion at Talk:Yeomanry#Page_split, there doesn't appear to be any opposition to splitting off my edits to the article Yeomanry to create a new article titled Yeomanry Cavalry (currently a redirect). The Yeomanry article needs to be reverted to this version, and the new Yeomanry Cavalry article needs to retain a record of my edits in the version history (which is why I can't simply copy/paste the current contents over). Would you be able to help with this? Factotem (talk) 15:51, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

"... he was being undermined with Berlin" — What is that supposed to mean? I only know the expression "to be undermined by sb", not "... with sb".--Boczi (talk) 10:39, 14 February 2018 (UTC)

It means what it says. He was being undermined with (the authorities in) Berlin. It is a common usage in English. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 01:49, 15 February 2018 (UTC)

Sorry for bothering, but does it mean the same as "being undermined by …", in fact?--Boczi (talk) 14:29, 18 February 2018 (UTC)

News and updates for administrators from the past month (February 2018).

Administrator changes

Lourdes†

AngelOfSadness • Bhadani • Chris 73 • Coren • Friday • Midom • Mike V

† Lourdes has requested that her admin rights be temporarily removed, pending her return from travel.

Guideline and policy news

• The autoconfirmed article creation trial (ACTRIAL) is scheduled to end on 14 March 2018. The results of the research collected can be read on Meta Wiki.
• Community ban discussions must now stay open for at least 24 hours prior to being closed.
• A change to the administrator inactivity policy has been proposed. Under the proposal, if an administrator has not used their admin tools for a period of five years and is subsequently desysopped for inactivity, the administrator would have to file a new RfA in order to regain the tools.
• A change to the banning policy has been proposed which would specify conditions under which a repeat sockmaster may be considered de facto banned, reducing the need to start a community ban discussion for these users.

Technical news

• CheckUsers are now able to view private data such as IP addresses from the edit filter log, e.g. when the filter prevents a user from creating an account. Previously, this information was unavailable to CheckUsers because access to it could not be logged.
• The edit filter has a new feature contains_all that edit filter managers may use to check if one or more strings are all contained in another given string.

Miscellaneous

• Following the 2018 Steward elections, the following users are our new stewards: -revi, Green Giant, Rxy, There'sNoTime, علاء.

Obituaries

• Bhadani (Gangadhar Bhadani) passed away on 8 February 2018. Bhadani joined Wikipedia in March 2005 and became an administrator in September 2005. While he was active, Bhadani was regarded as one of the most prolific Wikipedians from India.

---