User talk:Roger Davies: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
→‎RfA thanks: new section
Line 201: Line 201:


Is it clearer now? If not, I can have another look. Thanks mate. [[User:Abraham, B.S.|Abraham, B.S.]] ([[User talk:Abraham, B.S.|talk]]) 08:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)
Is it clearer now? If not, I can have another look. Thanks mate. [[User:Abraham, B.S.|Abraham, B.S.]] ([[User talk:Abraham, B.S.|talk]]) 08:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)

:Hmm, not bad, but I just don't think it really sits well with the rest of the paragraph; it may be just me, but there seems to be something iffy about it. I can't really think of any other way I can write it, but I'm definitely open to any further suggestions you are able to offer. Thanks, [[User:Abraham, B.S.|Abraham, B.S.]] ([[User talk:Abraham, B.S.|talk]]) 05:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)


== RfA thanks ==
== RfA thanks ==

Revision as of 05:16, 13 October 2008

ARCHIVES: 123456789101112



If you post a message here, I'll usually respond here
(on this page) unless you ask me to reply elsewhere.


Re:Insignia

Not a problem. In fact, your timing is perfect: I was just about to do that :) TomStar81 (Talk) 01:00, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, everythings been handed out: New coordinators have recieved there stars, returning coordinators (myself excluded) recieved the stars and the barnstar, retiring coordinators have recieved the barnstar award. If I messed anything up, feel fre to ask me to try again :) TomStar81 (Talk) 01:16, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

thank you

File:Lorrette Cemetary.JPG

Milhist Coordinator elections
Thank you very much for your much appreciated support in the recently concluded September 2008 Military History Wikiproject Coordinator Elections. I was thoroughly surprised to walk away with a position of Coordinator. Thank-you for your support, and I assure you that I will do my best to serve this spectacular project well. Esteemed Regards, Cam (Chat) 01:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Notre Dame de Lorrette Cemetary - Arras, France

Congrats!

Lead Coordinator of the
Military history Wikiproject,
October 2008 — March 2009

Congratulations on your election as Lead Coordinator of the Military history Wikiproject. In honor of your achievement, I present you with these stars. I wish you and your staff luck in the coming term. -- TomStar81 (Talk) 01:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]


The WikiProject Barnstar
In gratitude for your coordination services to the Military history WikiProject, from February 2008 to September 2008, please accept this barnstar.-- TomStar81 (Talk) 01:05, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats on your re-elction Roger. I know you will continue to lead the project to greater heights. Kyriakos (talk) 09:12, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Fell free to tell me if you even need my assistance. Kyriakos (talk) 09:18, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: Something for you

Thank you very much for the award, and for your kind words. It has been a pleasure to work under your leadership over the past seven months. Kirill (prof) 01:14, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

emeritus userbox

Well, thanks for the suggestion. If you'd also take a look a few sections up on my talk page, TomStar81 had already stated that he was going to award Kirill a special version of the stars (the story is quite interesting if you don't already know about them). I have tried to integrate those onto the userbox in my Sandbox, but the image does not work correctly. I'm open to suggestions, but I think that keeping the stars would be best to keep all of our coordinator userboxes looking somewhat uniform. -MBK004 02:41, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The image would need to be redrawn with a transparent background rather than a white one for it to be usable on a colored userbox; I can do that if you'd like. It's probably a candidate to be converted to an SVG as well, but I don't have the right tools for that, unfortunately.
(Since I don't actually use userboxes on my user page, incidentally, this may be something that doesn't really need to be dealt with at the moment; you could just avoid making that particular userbox until we get an emeritus coordinator that would like to make use of it.) Kirill (prof) 02:52, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Perhaps the solution is to make the person who makes the graphic a coordinator emeritus? That way, we get the userbox AND somewhere to display it :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:10, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Geesh...don't take this "thinking outside the box" thing too seriously now...;) Cam (Chat) 06:21, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
[Chuckle] --ROGER DAVIES talk 06:23, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh wow, I didn't even realize the pun in that. God, I'm slow today. Cam (Chat) 22:55, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Resignation

Hi Roger,

I'd like to withdraw/decline/resign the coordinator role. I was actually hesitant about running this time—I scrubbed out a statement on an earlier day but put my name back in soon after. Hopefully I don't cheese off too many of the people that voted for me. The reasons are

  1. I feel guilty not helping to fix up MILHIST FACs/FARCs, which I think I should do if I am a coord, and I am always trying to write more and am getting substantially busier in RL
  2. Also a new relatively user Djwilms (talk · contribs) has popped up working on 19th century Vietnamese military history articles, which makes things more exciting on the article writing front, especially now that he has taken to writing articles related to the likes of Can Vuong, Phan Dinh Phung, Truong Dinh that I have been interested in in recent times.
  3. I have (relatively) strong "fundamentalist" outlook on Wikipedia, which I think is probably becoming less mainstream on Wikipedia, so I think that as a more structured/flowchart approach becomes more favoured, I would be less relevant/loose cannon/irrelevant to this model and someone else can come in and contribute whatever they have to contribute
  4. From my reading of the statistics, probably the first incumbent coord to get a decrease in raw support - excluding coords who went on a break and came back again; From my psephological experience on Wikipedia, an incumbent generally gets more raw support over time (although often more opposes as well) due to the fact that so much voting depends on public profile. So getting less support probably means that my attitude/ideology (or incompetence) is probably cheesing people off—probably the fundamentalist part and attitudes on MOS
  5. I once stopped writing articles for a certain WikiProject because I didn't like what the "seniors" (no official coords in that project) were doing so I think if I stick around here maybe some people will stop participating because of the same reasoning
  6. Also with the increased focus on coordinating by task force, I think it's better that someone else step in because, apart from the handful of articles that I write about, I know almost nothing about military history.
  7. I envisage nothing changing on my part as far as participating less or whatever, except a psychological burden being removed so I should be more productive anyway. The only official thing that changes is that I can't close A-class reviews- that's fine, I comment in a lot of them anyway.

YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 08:53, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's for the best for everyone. I think it'll freshen me up. I'm not too worried/hurt about a voter backlash, I've received much worse, including some double-dealing, fall-guy traps, faking emails to get people in trouble etc by political users who were all schmoozing it up when they wanted me to dispose their enemies etc... Nothing like that happened here of course. The coords all have 5+ A/FAs etc and none of them are running about trying to start a personality cult and disciple-gathering while never doing any work unlike some "seniors" in some other WikiProjects. It's just a lifestyle change. I was in two minds about walking away and getting more article work of course due to increasing time pressures, and I think this was the right thing to do. The only thing I can't do now is close a few A-class reviews, which only cost a few minutes a week anyway. I don't tally the contest votes because I'm competing obviously. I'm not sure how many people would be put off writing A/FA class articles if they consider it to be an endorsement of a coordinator to be a "fingerwagging headmaster" (MOS) but its good to stay on the safe side. They might think "If that's how MILHIST is run I don't want to be a part of it". If I want to change something I can do my own thing, but I think staying away and not feeling pressured about helping to spruce up the FACs and FARCs will rejuvenate me. Which involves fixing up MOS and then harping to people about getting into good habits about MOS and why it's important for FAs... and why it's important because MILHIST likes to keep its quality tradition up. I'll continue to do these MOS things without proselytising about it of course, which I'm probably less inclined to do without. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think it's fair to say that it is a beauty contest, after all, everyone who got elected has written lots of A/FAs and nobody did publicity stunts, which unfortunately is the staple diet of getting political job promotions in other parts of Wikipedia which is a credit to this wikiproject. The members of this WikiProject are good at working out who is useful and who is freeloading. I can think of a lot of serious article writers, predominantly oldtimers, who have criticised Sandy and the modern FA system, and said that they would boycott it. I don't mind whatever the system is, but I don't want MILHIST people to boycott MHR-A/FA. YellowMonkey (bananabucket) 07:30, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

WP 0.7 noms

Hello Roger! I've begun checking what articles could or should be included in the 0.7 release, and have begun nominating some of them (for now, I'm sifting through A-class and GA articles that weren't included in the master list). However, I notice that there is a big backlog, and not much movement on the part of the assessment team. Perhaps it would be better if we first gather the WPMILHIST proposals and send them as a single package "approved" by the project, instead of individual nominations? PS. Thanks for the barnstar, and congrats for the re-election! Best regards, Constantine 17:33, 1 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Congrats

Congrats on winning the election for Lead Coordinator of Wikiproject Military History, I knew you could do it. I just hope someday I can become a Coordinator. You are such an inspiration! God Bless, and thanks for all you do.--LORDoliver † (talk) 02:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry For The Question

I know you must be busy ,but I have a question Could you explain to me how Service Awards work.--LORDoliver † (talk) 02:33, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sept newsletter

I have added the contest dept to the newsletter. We have a new leader for the first time in a long time! Do you want to hand out the barnstars for a bit of variety? Are we going to comment on the YellowMonkey resignation in the newsletter? Regards. Woody (talk) 11:21, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The awards have been handed out. Sorry for the delay, I was in class and thus unable to react swiftly to your message. TomStar81 (Talk) 19:31, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I will look over it now. Things are calming down for me now, back into routine so I should be able to get a couple more VC lists done in the next few days, and back to more of the behind the scenes MILHIST stuff. Best regards. Woody (talk) 15:56, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Done. Woody (talk) 16:07, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I started reading but abandoned that idea when I saw a certain users monologue. I might try and review some articles instead! Regards. Woody (talk) 16:16, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

BrEng review of Mrs. Pankhurst?

Hello, RogerD! I've just finished reconstructing the article on prominent British women's suffrage activist Emmeline Pankhurst, and I wonder if you'd do me a favor – probably not now, since we're just entering peer review mode, but sometime before we go to FAC. I've tried my best to apply British English, since it's obviously needed here, and I'm hoping you could have a look to make sure it's all legit. I'd really appreciate it, and as I say, it's nothing urgent. I'll probably need you in a week or two. Thanks in advance! Scartol • Tok 19:11, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, no problems. (My grandfather knew Sylvia, by the way.) --ROGER DAVIES talk 03:14, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, really? I can't decide what I think of any of them. They were all crazy in their own way.. =) Thanks for the help; we've apparently got some other folks also casually checking it over as we polish and review. Cheers! Scartol • Tok 19:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks

Thanks for answering my message I can only imagine how busy you are right now. I'm trying to keep the Unassessed Article number low, but I guess it's a good thing if people are creating more articles.--LORDoliver † (talk) 20:43, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Yellow Monkey's spot

I'm aware of YellowMonkey resigning. I will accept, well aware of the vote gap that makes me have to prove myself far more than others would have to.--King Bedford I Seek his grace 22:59, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Are we officially accepting Bedford as the 9th coordinator? I ask becuase if we are I want to make sure he gets his stars asap :) TomStar81 (Talk) 02:41, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
There might be a controversy brewing about par. 3 of his user page but other than that I'd say that concensus is imminent :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 02:46, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Then I think I will go ahead and present Bedford with the Coordinator's stars. I wish him luck. God knows he is going to need it :) TomStar81 (Talk) 02:51, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Should we go ahead and update the actual coordinator lists, then? Kirill (prof) 02:58, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, I guess so. It looks like a done deal. The only remaining objection is from Woody and he said he could live with it. --ROGER DAVIES talk 03:02, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, done. I've listed YM as "resigned" in the history; but I'm not sure whether that's the best way to handle it. Should we keep the name there (annotated or otherwise), or take it off? Thoughts? Kirill (prof) 03:06, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I wondered about that. I'd be tempted to just take it off. It happened so soon after the event that it's scarcely worth recording for posterity (especially accounting for time differences) and the fewer dramas the better :) --ROGER DAVIES talk 03:12, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]
True enough; I suppose anyone really curious can dig through the archives well enough on their own. Cheers! Kirill (prof) 03:15, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you

The Copyeditor's Barnstar
For his extraordinarily brilliant work in copy-editing the articles Harry Murray and Percy Herbert Cherry, which thus enhanced their readability and sophistication levels, I present the Copyeditor's Barnstar to Roger Davies. Thanks mate, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 10:29, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Inactice A-class Reviews

There are a number of reviews where the nominator has not responded in a while. How long should we wait before failing these? Also, in the Battle of Fort Henry ACR the nominator has three conditional supports, but he hasn't actually fulfilled the conditions. I'm assuming that this is a failed ACR, as well, should we decide to close it. Thanks, JonCatalán(Talk) 15:42, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Re: W 0.7

Can you please establish some standards for release. When will starts be relased? Wandalstouring (talk) 10:07, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Just saw the Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/Wikipedia 0.7/C02 load you seem to have been burdened with, so now understand where the busy came from
So I'm wondering if that was not the best place to direct energies and leave the Soviet titles to be resolved later? --mrg3105 (comms) ♠♣ 09:34, 5 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

PHC update

Hi Roger, I just thought I would give you an update on the Percy Herbert Cherry article. It has now [finally] been passed as A-Class, and I would like to thank you for all of your help, support and contributions that led to the article's promotion. Once again, thanks. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 16:02, 4 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

C-3PO

Not sure who that was, but I can assure you I had nothing to do with those moves--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♣ 11:10, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Buckshot

Sorry I did see that it was closed after I had cast my vote, thought it was better just to leave it then go back and revert Jim Sweeney (talk) 13:53, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXI (September 2008)

The September 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 23:45, 6 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

articles for deletion

Which articles that I edited you think should be deleted?

Also, I will be away until tomorrow evening Australian time, so will not be able to contribute on the title discussion, however I left several requests and questions--mrg3105 (comms) ♠♣ 08:08, 8 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

MS West Honaker

Hi Roger, I was just going through the review page and saw that a few A-Class reviews have now been closed as either failed or promoted. Among them was the article MS West Honaker put forward by Bellhalla, which you closed as promoted on the review page. However, this is not reflected on the article's take page which still classes the article as GA and under A-Class review. I presume this was just a minor oversight due to your busy schedule, but I just thought I would tell you. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 13:40, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That's awesomely diplomatic of you, Bryce ... Thanks! Now fixed. --ROGER DAVIES talk 13:45, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RE:W.07 Checklists

Sorry it took me so long to get about to it. If it provides a link and says it is OK should I mark it KEEP or USE LINK? Harland1 (t/c) 17:17, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Invisible Barnstar
In recognition of your important behind-the-scenes work in organising the reviews of nominations for the Release Version 0.7. Harland1 (t/c) 17:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Can't believe no-one's given this to you yet:). Harland1 (t/c) 17:31, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

3d Kharkov

Yes, of course, that would be awesome! Admittedly, I wrote the aftermath section and the lead hastily, since I had gotten the urge to finish the article after the long period it took to write the background and battle sections. So, I would bet that the lead would probably need a few edits (which I will look to do, as well, over the next few days). In any case, I would appreciate any type of copyedit which you could lend a hand with. Thanks! JonCatalán(Talk) 17:19, 9 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Roger. Great work on winding up this incredible saga of Soviet operation names!! Can't thank you enough! Cheers Buckshot06(prof) 13:45, 11 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

re: ACR CSJ

Hi Roger, thanks for correcting my typo and pointing out the sentence that needs clarification. What the sentence was ment to convey was that Jeffries was promoted to lieutenant in the Citizens Military Force before receiving appointment as a second lieutenant in the Australian Imperial Force. I have reworded it as:

He was promoted to lieutenant in the Citizens Military Force during July 1915. On 1 February 1916, Jeffries transfered to the Australian Imperial Force and was allotted to C Company of the 34th Battalion as a second lieutenant.

Is it clearer now? If not, I can have another look. Thanks mate. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 08:07, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, not bad, but I just don't think it really sits well with the rest of the paragraph; it may be just me, but there seems to be something iffy about it. I can't really think of any other way I can write it, but I'm definitely open to any further suggestions you are able to offer. Thanks, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:16, 13 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

RfA thanks

Roger, thanks for supporting me in my recent RfA. Also, thanks for your comments on Pied-Noir and Marquis de Lafayette. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 23:56, 12 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]