Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Jump to content

User talk:Hawkeye7/Archive 2015: Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
EyeSerene (talk | contribs)
Line 820: Line 820:


Just a note to let you know that [[John Sherman Cooper]], an article you commented on when it was [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/John Sherman Cooper|up for A-class review at WP:MILHIST]], has now been [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Sherman Cooper/archive1|nominated at FAC]], if you would like to comment. Thanks. [[User:Acdixon|Acdixon]] <sup><span class="plainlinks">([[User talk:Acdixon|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Acdixon|contribs]])</span></sup> 14:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Just a note to let you know that [[John Sherman Cooper]], an article you commented on when it was [[Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Assessment/John Sherman Cooper|up for A-class review at WP:MILHIST]], has now been [[Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/John Sherman Cooper/archive1|nominated at FAC]], if you would like to comment. Thanks. [[User:Acdixon|Acdixon]] <sup><span class="plainlinks">([[User talk:Acdixon|talk]] '''·''' [[Special:Contributions/Acdixon|contribs]])</span></sup> 14:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

== Congratulations again! ==

{| style="border: 2px solid lightsteelblue; background-color: whitesmoke;"
|rowspan="2" valign="middle" | [[Image:WPMH ACR (Swords).png|90px]]
|rowspan="2" |
|style="font-size: x-large; padding: 0; vertical-align: middle; height: 1.1em;" |&ensp;'''The ''[[Wikipedia:WikiProject_Military_history/Awards#A-Class_medals|Military history A-Class medal with swords]]'''''&ensp;
|-
|style="vertical-align: middle; border-top: 1px solid lightsteelblue;" | In recognition of your continued outstanding article work, you are hereby awarded the A-Class Medal with Swords for the articles [[Armed Forces Special Weapons Project]], [[Battle of Milne Bay]] and [[Frederick E. Morgan]], promoted to A-Class between December 2011 and March 2012. On behalf of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, [[User:EyeSerene|<span style="font-family:Verdana;color:#4B0082">EyeSerene</span>]]<sup>[[User talk:EyeSerene|<span style="color:#6B8E23">talk</span>]]</sup> 10:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)
|}

Revision as of 10:23, 22 March 2012

Archive
Archive

Archives:

2007 · 2008 · 2009 · 2010 · 2011


Alexander the Great edition triple laurel crown

Your majesty, I am pleased to award the coveted Alexander the Great edition triple laurel crown to Hawkeye7. This special award recognizes the rare editor who contributes at least 15 pieces of Featured content, 15 Good articles, and 15 "Did you know?" entries. Thank you for your contributions to the project! SMasters (talk) 06:50, 23 December 2011 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Tireless Contributor Barnstar
For your hard work on Military related articles which would have been left untouched for the years to come. Bidgee (talk) 11:00, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Congratulations

The Barnstar of Awesomeness
Awarded to Hawkeye7, as part of AustralianRupert's 2012 New Year Honours List, in recognition of their work on several highly visible topics throughout 2011. Thank you and keep up the good work! AustralianRupert (talk) 10:14, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Thanks

Many thanks for assessing the various biographical articles that I have been working on. Dormskirk (talk) 11:05, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

GA Review

Hi, I'm with the Wikipedia:WikiProject AP Biology 2011. I've been working on the Olympic marmot as part of a project, and now, multiple reviewers have told me that it's ready to be reviewed for GA! I nominated it, but TCO suggests to recruit reviewers to facilitate the process, and he directed me to you and a few other users. I would like to ask if you weren't too busy, to do the GA review for the Olympic marmot. I'd really appreciate it! I'm going to ask a few of the other names he gave me about this too, and whoever has the time to get to it first can review it. Thanks! Imthebombliketicktick (talk) 17:42, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Main page appearance: Battle of Bardia

This is a note to let the main editors of Battle of Bardia know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on January 3, 2012. You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/January 3, 2012. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask featured article director Raul654 (talk · contribs) or his delegate Dabomb87 (talk · contribs), or start a discussion at Wikipedia talk:Today's featured article/requests. If the previous blurb needs tweaking, you might change it—following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. The blurb as it stands now is below:

The Battle of Bardia was fought over three days between 3 and 5 January 1941, as part of Operation Compass in the Second World War. Australian Major General Iven Mackay's 6th Division assaulted the strongly held Italian fortress of Bardia, Libya, assisted by air support and naval gunfire, and under the cover of an artillery barrage. The 16th Infantry Brigade attacked at dawn from the west, where the defences were known to be weak. This allowed the infantry and 23 Matilda II tanks of the 7th Royal Tank Regiment to enter the fortress and capture all their objectives, along with 8,000 prisoners. In the second phase of the operation, the 17th Infantry Brigade exploited the breach made in the perimeter. On the second day, the 16th Infantry Brigade captured the township of Bardia, cutting the fortress in two. On the third day, the 19th Infantry Brigade advanced south from Bardia, supported by artillery and the Matilda tanks. Meanwhile, the Italian garrisons in the north surrendered to the 16th Infantry Brigade and the Support Group of the British 7th Armoured Division. The victory at Bardia enabled the Allied forces to continue the advance into Libya and ultimately capture almost all of Cyrenaica. (more...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 31 December 2011 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Philippines campaign (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) 10:51, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

Blamey

G'day, Hawkeye, I'm currently working on expanding the 2nd Battalion (Australia) article offline. In relation to Thomas Blamey, I've come across this in Bean (vol 6, 1942, p. 193): "short term in command of the 2nd Battalion and 1st Brigade". Currently the AWM's article [1] on the 2nd Battalion only provides an incomplete list of battalion commanders (I've managed to find at least four, when they currently only have two), and it doesn't list Blamey. Nor does the AWM timeline for him mention a battalion: [2] I'm just wondering if in the course of your research for the wiki article you came across anything that confirmed that it was the 2nd Bn that he commanded and it had any dates of when Blamey was in command. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 11:53, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

Sorry, I've found it in the article now. Apologies, I should have read it closer. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 12:04, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 02 January 2012

Greetings

Hi Hawkeye. I don't think we've met before, but I see you are working on the Atomic bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki, an article that has interested me for a long time. The current arbitration case is emotionally charged. I've been through a lot of cases User:Jehochman/Arbitration, and my unsolicited, possibly unwelcomed advice is that you should either strenuously defend yourself, or else admit failures. If you decide to admit failures you can either pledge to learn from mistakes and not repeat them, or you can resign if you don't want to deal with the stresses of being an admin. Any of those paths will lead to a better result than letting people demonize you without hearing your side of the story. The current discussion is making me feel uncomfortable, like you might get over-sanctioned for any errors. Best regards, Jehochman Talk 16:18, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Thankyou for you advice. It is hard to know how to handle these things. I originally thought that it would be straightforward to fix up the article, which looked fairly good, but has turned out that there are a number of books referenced without page number, and blocks without references. I have added two more sections. A third, on the legacy of the bombings, is needed. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:15, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jeremy Doyle

The DYK project (nominate) 23:47, 3 January 2012 (UTC)

Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki

Gday Hawkeye. There seems to be a named ref that is missing some info at Atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki (# 113 - <ref name="Generals"/>). From going back through the article history it looks like it might be the fol:

{{cite web| title = The Atomic Bomb and the End of World War II, A Collection of Primary Sources| publisher=[[George Washington University]]| date = August 13, 1945| format = PDF| work=National Security Archive Electronic Briefing Book No. 162| url = http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB162/72.pdf| coauthors = General Hull Colone Seazen}}

Do you know if this is right? I didn't want to just add it without checking. Cheers. Anotherclown (talk) 10:40, 4 January 2012 (UTC)

Yes, that's right. Fixed it, and a couple of other refs. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:48, 4 January 2012 (UTC)
Great, thanks again. Anotherclown (talk) 00:29, 5 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Douglas MacArthur, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Supreme Commander (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) 10:45, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

As you blocked Malleus in 2011, would you please respond to Wikipedia talk:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement/Evidence#Requests for further evidence - Collaborative evidence collectionrcement/Evidence. Thank you. Dougweller (talk) 09:10, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

Canberra Capitals

Hi. :D Hola! :D I'm working on some articles on my user space about members of the Canberra Capitals. When I get them to DYK length, I'd like to move them over to the main space and if you could nominate them for DYK, that would be awesome. ;)

Drafts that are close to being ready and need a copy edit before a move and nomination:

--LauraHale (talk) 09:57, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

In the course of an ongoing case, the Arbitration Committee has decided to collect all relevant information regarding Malleus Fatuorum's block log and, as such, has created a table of all blocks, which can be found here. Since you either blocked or unblocked Malleus Fatuorum, you are welcome to comment, if you wish. Salvio Let's talk about it! 14:03, 9 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 09 January 2012


John Scanlon/Scanlan

Hi there, I've noticed you have tidied up my recent expansions on a couple of articles relating to Aussie generals so I thought I would raise this matter with you. In working on the expansion of the John Scanlon article, I realised the page was created with incorrect spelling of the surname (it should be Scanlan as per the references). I have created a new page - John Joseph Scanlan (soldier) - and turned the original page/talk page into redirects but perhaps the original page should be deleted altogether given the spelling of the surname? Apologies if this matter should be raised another way. Cheers. Zawed (talk) 10:23, 10 January 2012 (UTC)

No worries. Looks very good. What you should do now is submit the article to Template talk:Did you know. If you would prefer, I can nominate it for you. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:19, 10 January 2012 (UTC)
Thanks! I don't know much about the DYK process so I will leave that up to you if you don't mind. Cheers! Zawed (talk) 08:31, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Request barnstar

I know I was a pain in the ass, but I helped that MP article. May I please have a barnie like you gave to others?TCO (Reviews needed) 05:36, 11 January 2012 (UTC)

Milhist FA, A-Class and Peer Reviews Oct-Dec 2011

The Content Review Medal of Merit
By order of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, for your devoted contributions to the WikiProject's Peer, A-Class and Featured article reviews for the period October–December 2011, I am delighted to award you the Content Review Medal. Buggie111 (talk) 17:29, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

Southeast Pacific Area

Hawkeye7, would you mind please reviewing my current writings at Panama Sea Frontier and give any advice on appropriate writing-up of the Southeast Pacific Area? Thanks for your help, Buckshot06 (talk) 22:21, 14 January 2012 (UTC)

  • Looks good. I have taken the liberty of splitting it in two, so there are now separate articles on the Panama Sea Frontier and the Southeast Pacific Area. Hope this is okay. Hawkeye7 (talk) 05:35, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Arthur S. Carpender (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Atlantic Fleet and Hydrographic
Southeast Pacific Area (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Balboa

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 10:38, 15 January 2012 (UTC)

Military Historian of the Year

Nominations for the "Military Historian of the Year" for 2011 are now open. If you would like to nominate an editor for this award, please do so here. Voting will open on 22 January and run for seven days. Thanks! On behalf of the coordinators, Nick-D (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:17, 15 January 2012 (UTC) You were sent this message because you are a listed as a member of the Military history WikiProject.

Assessment of Point Class Cutter

Thank you for your assessment of the article Point class cutter that you provided; but I couldn't help notice that you assessed it as B class and then changed it to C class. I am curious about what caused you to change your mind and also what in your opinion could be done to the referencing to make it complete or better? I'm trying to learn here and not criticize. Thank you for any help or guidance you can provide. Cheers. Cuprum17 (talk) 02:02, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

Another editor pointed out that two small sections were still uncited. My apologies for the confusion. Hawkeye7 (talk) 02:07, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Overlooked those, Mate. I put them in; would you mind looking at it again and re-assess? Thanks. Getting late and I have to go to work in the morning...Have a nice day! Cuprum17 (talk) 03:39, 16 January 2012 (UTC)
Re-assessed B-class. Hawkeye7 (talk) 09:38, 16 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 16 January 2012

Ping

Hey mate, did you notice this? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 06:07, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Alice Coddington

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Brigitte Ardossi

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:03, 21 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Carly Wilson

The DYK project (nominate) 00:03, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited Singapore strategy, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Blue Danube (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) 11:17, 22 January 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXX, January 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 00:06, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Nicole Hunt

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Arthur S. Carpender

The DYK project (nominate) 16:03, 23 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for John Joseph Scanlan (soldier)

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

Happy Australia Day! Thank you for contributing to Australian content!

Australian Wikimedian Recognition (AWR)
Thank you for your contributions on English Wikipedia that have helped improve Australian related content. :D It is very much appreciated. :D Enjoy your Australia Day and please continue your good work! LauraHale (talk) 01:39, 26 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 23 January 2012

Congratulations

The WikiChevrons
Congratulations for being nominated as one of the military historians of the year for 2011 in recognition of your quality articles on high-profile subjects, including J. Robert Oppenheimer, Manhattan Project, Relief of Douglas MacArthur and Thomas Blamey. I am pleased to award you the WikiChevrons in recognition of this achievement. For the Coordinators, Nick-D (talk) 03:24, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Marianna Tolo

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:02, 29 January 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Lauren Jansen

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:04, 31 January 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 30 January 2012

DYK for Hannah Bowley

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:02, 1 February 2012 (UTC)

Milne Bay ACR

G'day, Hawkeye, would you mind if I put myself down as a co-nom on the Milne Bay ACR? I've been meaning to nominate it, but have found myself caught up in trying to rework Colonial forces of Australia (it's been a big job as it was a large article lacking almost any references when I came to it). I'm not sure I will be able to take the lead on the ACR as work is getting pretty busy now (Feb is when we have the first platoons of the year march-in for training and then March we are out in the field), but I should be able to help out with some of the questions that might arise. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 09:52, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

Please do. That would be great. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:07, 2 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Jessica Bibby

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Natalie Porter

The DYK project (nominate) 08:04, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

Template:Campaignbox Battle for Australia

In regards to this comment, the template was sort-of my fault ;) I created the Battle of Australia article on which it was based before reading the historiography on this topic (the article looked like this at the time the template was created by Grant65 (talk · contribs)). I've since re-written the article, though it's still not very good. I'd support the template's deletion. Nick-D (talk) 10:49, 6 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 February 2012

Manhattan Project

In case you finished "watching" the discussion, I replied to your last on my page.--Reedmalloy (talk) 23:50, 9 February 2012 (UTC)

MSU Interview

Dear Hawkeye7,


My name is Jonathan Obar user:Jaobar, I'm a professor in the College of Communication Arts and Sciences at Michigan State University and a Teaching Fellow with the Wikimedia Foundation's Education Program. This semester I've been running a little experiment at MSU, a class where we teach students about becoming Wikipedia administrators. Not a lot is known about your community, and our students (who are fascinated by wiki-culture by the way!) want to learn how you do what you do, and why you do it. A while back I proposed this idea (the class) to the community HERE, were it was met mainly with positive feedback. Anyhow, I'd like my students to speak with a few administrators to get a sense of admin experiences, training, motivations, likes, dislikes, etc. We were wondering if you'd be interested in speaking with one of our students.


So a few things about the interviews:

  • Interviews will last between 15 and 30 minutes.
  • Interviews can be conducted over skype (preferred), IRC or email. (You choose the form of communication based upon your comfort level, time, etc.)
  • All interviews will be completely anonymous, meaning that you (real name and/or pseudonym) will never be identified in any of our materials, unless you give the interviewer permission to do so.
  • All interviews will be completely voluntary. You are under no obligation to say yes to an interview, and can say no and stop or leave the interview at any time.
  • The entire interview process is being overseen by MSU's institutional review board (ethics review). This means that all questions have been approved by the university and all students have been trained how to conduct interviews ethically and properly.


Bottom line is that we really need your help, and would really appreciate the opportunity to speak with you. If interested, please send me an email at obar@msu.edu (to maintain anonymity) and I will add your name to my offline contact list. If you feel comfortable doing so, you can post your name HERE instead.

If you have questions or concerns at any time, feel free to email me at obar@msu.edu. I will be more than happy to speak with you.

Thanks in advance for your help. We have a lot to learn from you.

Sincerely,

Jonathan Obar --Jaobar (talk) 01:14, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

Support

I know it's difficult waiting for the arbcom case that's been put off twice. You're a great admin and a great writer. Let me know if I can help. - Dank (push to talk) 23:37, 10 February 2012 (UTC)

What should be in Campaign Box templates

Hi can you check the discussion at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Military history#What should be in Campaign Box templates to check I have not misrepresented your comments. Jim Sweeney (talk) 12:10, 12 February 2012 (UTC)

96th Engineer Battalion

Hello, you may be interested in my edit of the 96th Engineer Battalion article you have largely contributed to. It is based on information that was on the ABC. AprilHare (talk) 01:21, 13 February 2012 (UTC)

"stewed most of the time"

I guess you're sick and tired of discussing that, but I'm not getting the "stewed" part in "who's apparently some sort of koala (ie a protected species who is stewed most of the time)". Are koalas literally stewed (when poached or hunted) or did you mean that as an euphemism for "drunk"? It looks like NYB interpreted it as the latter in the ArbCom proposed decision. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 17:35, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

Where does NYB say that? - Dank (push to talk) 17:57, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
"referring to another editor as 'stewed most of the time' was highly inappropriate" ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 18:20, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
A google search for "stewed koala" found the more literal interpretation plausible as well [3]. ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 18:33, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
Okay, so NYB didn't say that it meant "drunk". - Dank (push to talk) 18:53, 14 February 2012 (UTC)
So, how do interpret a statement about a living human said to be "stewed most of the time"? ASCIIn2Bme (talk) 19:52, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

As you put it on your user page, Dank, Wikipedia is no place for humor. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:05, 14 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 February 2012

Hi. When you recently edited Operation Alsos, you added links pointing to the disambiguation pages War Department and CIC (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) 10:53, 16 February 2012 (UTC)

Did you know help: Australian women water polo players

Hey! :D Do you remember how I did the Canberra Capitals and took every player on the current squad to WP:DYK? I'm drafting articles about the current Australia women's national water polo team 2012 Summer Olympics squad on my user space. I'm hoping to take these articles to WP:DYK in a week or two. (Trying to get pictures for the articles first.) If you could help improve the article drafts in my user space in preparation for eventually moving them to the main space, that would be fantastic. The articles I'm working on are:

At length
At length - Existing article merge
Not at length
Require merging DYK check elsewhere

They are all properly cited. They need help fixing the grammar, the flow, the organisation and possibly with information box info. If you can help improve them in my user space before they are eventually moved over and nominated, I would be happy to help give you credit on the DYK nomination. :) --LauraHale (talk) 02:42, 17 February 2012 (UTC)

Reginald Pinney

I know it's not the most exciting of biographies, but the Sassoon link is hard to resist! I've made a few improvements based on your comments - please let me know if there's anything else you feel is missing. Shimgray | talk | 17:37, 19 February 2012 (UTC)

re Fascinating case

Thanks so much! Sure, lemme first get started on revamping the page with sourced info, and get back to you. — Cirt (talk) 21:52, 20 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 February 2012

An arbitration case regarding Civility enforcement has now closed and the final decision is viewable at the link above. The following remedies have been enacted:

  1. Hawkeye7 (talk · contribs) is desysopped for wheel warring and conduct unbecoming of an administrator, in the face of previous admonishments regarding administrative conduct from the Arbitration Committee. Hawkeye7 may re-apply for the administrator permissions at RFA at any time.
  2. Thumperward (talk · contribs) is admonished for conduct unbecoming an administrator, and for failing to adequately explain his actions when requested by the community and Arbitration Committee.
  3. John (talk · contribs) is admonished for reversing another administrator's actions while said actions were under review through community discussion.
  4. Malleus Fatuorum (talk · contribs) is indefinitely topic banned from any page whose prefix begins with Wikipedia talk:Requests for Adminship. This remedy explicitly does not prevent him from !voting on RFA's; however, should his contributions to a specific request for adminship become disruptive, any uninvolved admin may ban him from further participation in that specific RFA. Further, Malleus Fatuorm is admonished for repeatedly personalizing disputes and engaging in uncivil conduct, personal attacks, and disruptive conduct.
  5. Administrators are reminded that blocks should be applied only when no other solution would prove to be effective, or when previous attempts to resolve a situation (such as discussion, warnings, topic bans, or other restrictions) have proven to be ineffective.
  6. All users are reminded to engage in discussion in a way that will neither disrupt nor lower the quality of such discourse. Personal attacks, profanity, inappropriate use of humour, and other uncivil conduct that leads to a breakdown in discussion can prevent the formation of a valid consensus. Blocks or other restrictions may be used to address repeated or particularly severe disruption of this nature, in order to foster a collaborative environment within the community as a whole.
  7. The imposition of discretionary sanctions, paroles, and related remedies by the community is done on an ad hoc basis in the absence of clear documented standards. The community is strongly encouraged to review and document standing good practice for such discussions. As a related but distinct issue, the community is encouraged to review and document common good practice for administrators imposing editing restrictions as a condition of an unblock and in lieu of blocks.
  8. Should any user subject to a restriction or topic ban in this case violate that restriction or ban, that user may be blocked, initially for up to one month, and then with blocks increasing in duration to a maximum of one year, with the topic ban clock restarting at the end of the block. Appeals of blocks may be made to the imposing administrator, and thereafter to the Administrators' noticeboard, or to Arbitration Enforcement, or to the Arbitration Committee. All blocks are to be logged at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Civility enforcement#Log of blocks, bans, and restrictions.

For the Arbitration Committee:
Mlpearc (powwow) 02:28, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Discuss this
  • I don't know how I feel about this... Like I said during the evidence collection phase. The actions taken against you rest entirely upon the notion, do we believe you when you said that you were aware of Malleus' FC comment. Does we believe your revised version of the events leading to the reblock or was your original statement binding? If you were unaware of Malleus' comment, then IMO the desysop is entirely appropriate---your rationale was way off. However, if you were aware of Malleus comment, then IMO the desysop is inappropriate (but your personal attack meritted a final warning.) So the question is, did you know or not? After the fact you said you did... and after 2 months to consider it and your contributions here to WP, I think we should have AGF that you did. ArbCOM let the merits of MF's positive contributions provide a shield against his transgressions, but yours don't seem to have been taken into as much consideration. Anyways, I hope you stick around and contribute productively to the community... you don't need the bit to be involved.---Balloonman Poppa Balloon 15:57, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
    • I think ArbCom felt they had no choice to desysop you. That's not to say I think it was a fair or right or just remedy (like Balloonman, I can't decide how I feel about it), but once they arrived at the conclusion that you had acted improperly, ArbCom would look weak (in view of you having been admonished just a few months ago) if they didn't do something tangible. That said, I disagree with Balloonman that they didn't take into account your many excellent contributions as they did Malleus'—I think the absence of even any proposed remedy beyond the desysop shows that they recognise that, despite what may have been lapses in judgement in this and the Racepacket case, you are a valuable editor. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 17:23, 21 February 2012 (UTC)
      • I have no doubts. As I said to you at the time, you made a brave and correct decision. It would have been easy to sidestep action as the vast majority of your former colleagues did. You had the short straw thrust into your hand by the inappropriate action of the preceding Admin. involved in this saga, which only adds to the irony of the decision to single you out for exceptional treatment when in fact you deserved to be exonerated. Leaky Caldron 17:50, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Hawkeye7, far as I'm concerned, Arbcomm was wrong to take the bit from you. @-Kosh► Talk to the VorlonsMoon Base Alpha-@ 19:47, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXI, February 2012

Full front page of The Bugle
Your Military History Newsletter

The Bugle is published by the Military history WikiProject. To receive it on your talk page, please join the project or sign up here.
If you are a project member who does not want delivery, please remove your name from this page. Your editors, Ian Rose (talk) and Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 09:54, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Defender of the Wiki Barnstar
I know it is little consolation for the loss of the bits, but you did much more to try to uphold WP:CIV than our pusillanimous Arbitrators. Wehwalt (talk) 12:00, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

Talkback

Hello, Hawkeye7. You have new messages at Talk:Operation Alsos/GA1.
Message added 06:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC). You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

Στc. 06:29, 23 February 2012 (UTC)

Nicholas Haussegger

Thanks a lot for your quick B-class review of Nicholas Haussegger. However, the WPMILHIST is still marked stub. If you could fix that, I'd appreciate it. Thanks. Djmaschek (talk) 20:47, 26 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Operation Alsos

The DYK project (nominate) 00:02, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited John Robinson (sculptor), you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Jackeroo (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) 10:27, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Gemma Beadsworth

The DYK project (nominate) 10:52, 27 February 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 February 2012

New Army website

Hi, As part of the long-overdue revamp of the Army website, almost all of the content from the Army History Unit's page has been removed! [4]. This includes the very-useful PDF versions of the papers from the Army history conferences they posted last year. Do you have any contacts in the AHU you could contact to see if they're planning on re-posting this material? (they no longer have a contact email for the AHU online). Thanks, Nick-D (talk) 06:57, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Rowena Webster

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:04, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Zoe Arancini

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Glencora Ralph

Casliber (talk · contribs) 08:05, 2 March 2012 (UTC)

Bugle op-ed?

Hi mate, as we haven't had any submissions yet for the March Bugle op-ed, it occurred to me that it'd be interesting to have one looking at MilHist (and perhaps WP as a whole) from the perspective of a professional historian such as yourself. Perhaps it might focus on the differing standards in terms of style, referencing, POV, etc, or something else again as you see fit. Anyway, if you'd like to do it, we'd ideally need the draft in under two weeks to make it into this month's edition, so let me know... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 05:04, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Any interest on this, mate? Perhaps expand and 'opinionate' the report you put in Project News? Up to you, just let me know... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 12:11, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Aaargh. I was hoping I could produce something on the long weekend, but was unable to do so. I can write up an expanded version of the report on Saturday. I promise to have that. Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:03, 15 March 2012 (UTC)
Done. Hawkeye7 (talk) 11:51, 16 March 2012 (UTC)
Thank you sir, I've added that to the op-ed page. Thanks, nice work, and good luck! Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 22:10, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Belated tks from me too, mate. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:13, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Just checking the Project News page, I was thinking when I suggested expanding and 'opinionating' the original AWM bit that the Op-Ed would, for this month's issue overall, replace rather than augment the Project News blurb, since the Op-Ed would be a superset of the news bit. Happy to go with majority opinion here so what do both of you think, Hawkeye/Ed? Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:27, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
Whichever way you prefer. Hawkeye7 (talk) 00:42, 22 March 2012 (UTC)

United States v. The Progressive

I think we should just gut the whole thing and start over, so your idea of making the body the new lead (for now) is a good one, to start, and once we're done expanding the subsections with new sourced info - we can rewrite the lede. Wanna split up the subsections? — Cirt (talk) 14:41, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

    • The idea was that anyone coming to the article would still find something in the meantime. The alternative would have been to create the new version in user space.
    • For the moment, I suggest that we keep a similar structure to what is there now:
      1. Background: nuclear weapons, the atomic energy acts of 1946 and 1954, development of the Teller-Ulam design, Morland writes his article for the Progressive
      2. Prior restraint: First Amendment, Free Speech in America, doctrine of Prior Restraint, Scientific American case, New York Times and other relevant cases
      3. Trial: The trials themselves, legal issues, in camera hearings, John Glenn, Chuck Hansen, the case is dropped
      4. Legacy:
    • Since I am a techno-military historian, I would like to write the Background section, and leave the Trial to you. Once I have finished the background I will start on the Prior Restraint section. Or, if you prefer, you can do that and we can converge on the Trial section. Hawkeye7 (talk) 20:00, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

Yeah, I'd like to start on the Prior restraint stuff, in that particular article, that topic's probably my favorite of all. :) — Cirt (talk) 20:02, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

I have finished the background section now, so I will be moving on to the Trial, starting with a paragraph on Morland and what he did. Hawkeye7 (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for R Force

--Allen3 talk 17:52, 3 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Teigan Van Roosmalen

The DYK project (nominate) 01:32, 4 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Alicia McCormack

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:48, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. In your recent article edits, you've added some links pointing to disambiguation pages. 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.

Battle of Goodenough Island (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added links pointing to Normanby Island and Cape Nelson
Gordon Grimsley King (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver)
added a link pointing to Smith Family

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 09:54, 5 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 March 2012

Henry Hardinge, 1st Viscount Hardinge

Many thanks for all the assessments you have done on the articles I have been seeking to improve. In the case of Henry Hardinge, 1st Viscount Hardinge I think you have kindly assessed the article as 'B' for mose wikiprojects but left it as 'start' for military history. Do you think you could please go back and have another look? Many thanks in anticipation. Dormskirk (talk) 21:11, 6 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Victoria Brown (water polo)

Casliber (talk · contribs) 00:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Kate Gynther

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Rebecca Rippon

Orlady (talk) 08:03, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Melissa Rippon

Orlady (talk) 08:04, 7 March 2012 (UTC)

Alicia McCormack

The reason for my deletions in this article are given on the talk page. The fact that the prince bowed to McCormack is not an event of sufficient notability to be in the introduction of an article about her life, even though it is a very good hook for the Wikipedia DYK. The fact of his bowing to her is still within the body of the article.

A hook doesn't need to be a really notable fact; it can be merely attention-getting. It is a journalistic, rather than an encyclopedic, device.

My other deletion was a bit of typically Australian journalistic ignorance- the use of a figure of speech "brought to his knees" with the added buzz of "literally"- in entirely the wrong context. Bowing has nothing to do with being brought to ones knees. The fact that some imbecile journalist wrote it doesn't make it necessarily stuff for inclusion in an encyclopedic article.

Amandajm (talk) 07:40, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

DYK for Charles Turner (water polo)

Orlady (talk) 16:04, 9 March 2012 (UTC)

Hey Hawkeye. Could you take another look at the above when you get a minute. :) Cheers, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:34, 13 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2012

Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington

Hi Hawkeye7 - I think I Have now sorted out the referencing for Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington. Please could you take another look? Thanks. Dormskirk (talk) 12:25, 17 March 2012 (UTC)

Many thanks for re-rating the article. Dormskirk (talk) 11:30, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

Hi. When you recently edited United States v. The Progressive, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Department of Energy (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) 10:27, 18 March 2012 (UTC)

The ALP's aversion to knighthoods

Hi there, Hawkeye7.

Some time ago I raised a question at Talk:Australian Labor Party#Position on titles, knighthoods etc. So far, nothing concrete has been forthcoming by way of a reliable source.

But I've just come across your post at Talk:John Northcott, which tells me my understanding is basically correct. But it's unsourced too. I'm wondering if you can contribute anything useful to my question at the ALP talk page? Cheers. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 08:55, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

Butting in, I've responded at the ALP talk page with an RAAF source that I believe speaks directly to your query, Jack. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:56, 19 March 2012 (UTC)
Thanks, Ian. -- Jack of Oz [your turn] 11:42, 19 March 2012 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2012

John Sherman Cooper

Just a note to let you know that John Sherman Cooper, an article you commented on when it was up for A-class review at WP:MILHIST, has now been nominated at FAC, if you would like to comment. Thanks. Acdixon (talk · contribs) 14:01, 21 March 2012 (UTC)

Congratulations again!

The Military history A-Class medal with swords
In recognition of your continued outstanding article work, you are hereby awarded the A-Class Medal with Swords for the articles Armed Forces Special Weapons Project, Battle of Milne Bay and Frederick E. Morgan, promoted to A-Class between December 2011 and March 2012. On behalf of the Military history WikiProject coordinators, EyeSerenetalk 10:23, 22 March 2012 (UTC)