User talk:Coemgenus/archive2012-3#Precious

Credo Reference, who generously donated 400 free Credo 250 research accounts to Wikipedia editors over the past two years, has offered to expand the program to include 100 additional reference resources. Credo wants Wikipedia editors to select which resources they want most. So, we put together a quick survey to do that:

• Link to Survey (should take between 5-10 minutes): [http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM http://www.surveymonkey.com/s/N8FQ6MM]

It also asks some basic questions about what you like about the Credo program and what you might want to improve.

At this time only the initial 400 editors have accounts, but even if you do not have an account, you still might want to weigh in on which resources would be most valuable for the community (for example, through WikiProject Resource Exchange).

Also, if you have an account but no longer want to use it, please leave me a note so another editor can take your spot.

If you have any other questions or comments, drop by my talk page or email me at wikiocaasi@yahoo.com. Cheers! Ocaasi ^{t | c} 17:12, 11 July 2012 (UTC)

Can you review your comment at Talk:List_of_Presidents_of_the_United_States#Survey and clarify your position? It appears from your comment that your "Oppose" was intended to be "Support". Dicklyon (talk) 13:45, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

:I fixed it, thanks. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:58, 28 July 2012 (UTC)

Per your suggestion, I've nominated Simon Bolivar Buckner for TFA on August 30, the 175-year anniversary of his inauguration as governor. Just thought you might be interested. Acdixon ^{(talk · contribs)} 18:12, 30 July 2012 (UTC)

:Great! Definitely worthy of the main page. --Coemgenus (talk) 09:54, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

right

We're approaching the beginning of 2012's final round. Pool A sees {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}} as the leader, with 300 points being awarded for the featured article Bivalvia, and Pool B sees {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}} in the lead, with 10 good articles, and over 35 articles eligible for good topic points. Pool A sees {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Muboshgu}} in second place with a number of articles relating to baseball, while Pool B's {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Ruby2010}} follows Grapple X, with a variety of contributions including the high-scoring, high-importance featured article on the 2010 film Pride & Prejudice. Ruby2010, like Grapple X, also claimed a number of good topic points; despite this, not a single point has been claimed for featured topics in the contest so far. The same is true for featured portals.

Currently, the eighth-place competitor (and so the lowest scorer who would reach the final round right now) has scored 332, more than double the 150 needed to reach the final round last year. In 2010, however, 430 was the lowest qualifying score. In this competition, we have generally seen scores closer to those in 2010 than those in 2011. Let's see what kind of benchmark we can set for future competitions! As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 22:20, 31 July 2012 (UTC)

I've taken Joseph B. Foraker to FAC. As one familiar with the time period, is there any chance you could take a look at it?--Wehwalt (talk) 21:25, 9 August 2012 (UTC)

:Sure, I should have some time this weekend. Good luck! --Coemgenus (talk) 09:55, 10 August 2012 (UTC)

::Thanks for the good wishes and the review. It's passed, now. I'm taking a break from 1896 but will no doubt return to it.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:30, 25 August 2012 (UTC)

Hi Coemgenus,

I'm writing both yourself and Cmguy777 regarding Chester A. Arthur. I would like to nominate it as a Today's Featured Article to run on the main page October 5th (Arthur's birthday) to coincide with the upcoming presidential election. I won't do so first without both of your consent, as you are the two main contributors to the article. Thanks --Chimino (talk) 15:03, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

:Sure, go for it! I'll support it at TFA and keep an eye on it while it's on the Main Page. Another good day might be September 19, when he became president. But either one is cool with me. --Coemgenus (talk) 15:11, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

::I might use Oct 5 just because it's easier to work in the blurb, but if you prefer Sept 19, we can do that too.--Chimino (talk) 19:27, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

:::Oct 5 is cool. I don't really have a preference, just putting it out there. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:23, 28 August 2012 (UTC)

right

The final is upon us! We are down to our final 8. A massive 573 was our lowest qualifying score; this is higher than the 150 points needed last year and the 430 needed in 2010. Even in 2009, when points were acquired for mainspace edit count in addition to audited content, 417 points secured a place. That leaves this year's WikiCup, by one measure at least, our most competitive ever. Our finalists, ordered by round 4 score, are:

1. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}} once again finishes the round in first place, leading Pool B. Grapple X writes articles about television, and especially The X-Files and Millenium, with good articles making up the bulk of the score.
2. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Miyagawa}} led Pool A this round. Fourth-place finalist last year, Miyagawa writes on a variety of topics, and has reached the final primarily off the back of his massive number of did you knows.
3. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Ruby2010}} was second in Pool B. Ruby2010 writes primarily on television and film, and scores primarily from good articles.
4. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Casliber}} finished third in Pool B. Casliber is something of a WikiCup veteran, having finished sixth in 2011 and fourth in 2010. Casliber writes on the natural sciences, including ornithology, botany and astronomy. Over half of Casliber's points this round were bonus points from the high-importance articles he has worked on.
5. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}} came second in Pool A. Also writing on biology, especially marine biology, Cwmhiraeth received 390 points for one featured article (Bivalvia) and one good article (pelican), topping up with a large number of did you knows.
6. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Muboshgu}} was third in Pool A. Muboshgu writes primarily on baseball, and this round saw Muboshgu's first featured article, Derek Jeter, promoted on its fourth attempt at FAC.
7. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Dana boomer}} was fourth in Pool A. She writes on a variety of topics, including horses, but this round also saw the high-importance lettuce reach featured article status.
8. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Sasata}} is another WikiCup veteran, having been a finalist in 2009 and 2010. He writes mostly on mycology.

However, we must also say goodbye to the eight who did not make the final, having fallen at the last hurdle: {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|GreatOrangePumpkin}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Ealdgyth}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Calvin999}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Piotrus}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Toa Nidhiki05}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|12george1}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|The Bushranger}} and {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|1111tomica}}. We hope to see you all next year.

On the subject of next year, a discussion has been opened here. Come and have your say about the competition, and how you'd like it to run in the future. This brainstorming will go on for some time before more focused discussions/polls are opened. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:11, 1 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi Coem. How's life in the colonies? Do you still reject king Goerge as your rightful monarch? Rebel Redcoat (talk)

:Hey, long time since I've seen you around these parts! Things are good in this unruly republic. Hope the Hanoverians aren't suppressing your rights too much. --Coemgenus (talk) 15:06, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

Hey Coemgenus, we've had a request for more coords to cover diverse periods and regions. Being a coord might help you focus some attention on Gilded Age articles. Interested? - Dank (push to talk) 15:26, 12 September 2012 (UTC)

:Dank, thanks for suggesting it, but I don't think I can devote much time to the project these days. Work and family keep me quite busy, which is good, I guess, but doesn't leave much time for Wiki. I had hoped to have Battle of Antietam up to FA by its 150th anniversary, but I haven't even read the sources yet. If things change in my schedule, and they may, I'll definitely take you up on it but, for now, I must decline. --Coemgenus (talk) 23:39, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

::Okay, nice to hear you're keeping busy. I know someone who can help with Antietam, I'll send them your way :) - Dank (push to talk) 23:44, 13 September 2012 (UTC)

:Thank you! --Coemgenus (talk) 09:35, 14 September 2012 (UTC)

Hello, you are receiving this message because you are currently a participant of WikiProject Good articles. Since the creation of the WikiProject, over 200 user's have joined to help review good article nominations and contribute to other sections of the WikiProject. Over the years, several of these users have stopped reviewing articles and/or have become inactive with the project but are still listed as participates. In order to improve communications with other participants and get newsletters sent out faster (newsletters will begin to be sent out monthly starting in October) all participants that are no longer active with the WikiProject will be removed from the participants list.

If you are still interested in being a participant for this WikiProject, please sign your user name here and please help review some articles so we can reduce the size of the backlog. If you are no longer interested, you do not need to sign your name anywhere and your name will be removed from the participants list after the deadline. Remember that even if you are not interested at this time, you can always re-add your name to the list whenever you want. The deadline to sign your name on the page above will be November 1, 2012. Thank-you. 13:23, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Sorry for having to send out a second message but a user has brought to my attention that a point mentioned in the first message should be clarified. If user's don't sign on this page, they will be moved to an "Inactive Participants" list rather then be being removed from the entire WikiProject. Sorry for any confusion.--Dom497 (talk)15:13, 22 September 2012 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Historical list of the Catholic bishops of the United States, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Theodosia (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) 11:27, 1 October 2012 (UTC)

right

We're over half way through the final, and so it is less than a month until we know for certain our 2012 WikiCup champion. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}} currently leads, followed by {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Sasata}}, {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}} and {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Casliber}}. However, we have no one resembling a breakaway leader, and so the competition is a long way from over. Next month's newsletter will feature a list of our winners (who are not necessarily only the finalists) and keep your eyes open for an article on the WikiCup in a future edition of The Signpost. The leaders are already on a par with last year's winners, but a long way from the huge scores seen in 2010. That said, a repeat of the competition from 2010 seems unlikely.

It is good to see that three-quarters of our finalists have already scored bonus points this round. This shows that, contrary to criticism that the WikiCup has received in the past, the competition does not merely incentivise the writing of trivial articles; instead, our top competitors are still spending their time contributing to high-importance articles, and bringing them to a high standard. This does a great service to the encyclopedia and its readers. Thank you, and good work!

The planning for next year's WikiCup is ongoing. Some straw polls have been opened concerning the scoring, and you can now sign up for next year's competition. As ever, if you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) J Milburn (talk) 19:51, 2 October 2012 (UTC)

|-

| valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 45%; background-color:#F0FFEA;" |

; Project NewsAs of October 2, 2012 at 19:05 (UTC).

• There are currently 15,862 Good Articles listed at WP:GA.

• The backlog at Good Article Nominations is 345 unreviewed articles. Out of 439 total nominations, 24 are on hold, 66 are under review, and 4 are seeking a second opinion. Please go to WP:GAN and review an article! Even just reviewing one will help!

::The oldest unreviewed articles are: General sejm, Prime Minister of Vietnam, Tanisha Thomas, Kosta Pećanac, and Jilly Kitzinger.

::The categories with the largest backlogs are: Social sciences and society (80 articles), Sports and recreation (70 articles), Music (63 articles), Theatre, film and drama (52 articles), and History (41 articles). Please consider reviewing articles within these sections.

::There are currently 13 articles up for reassessment at Good Article Reassessment. Please help out and go to WP:GAR and review an article! Remember that anyone can review articles that are listed under "Community Reassessment" even if another user has already listed their opinion...the more opinions, the better!

; Member News

• There are currently 222 members of WikiProject Good Articles! Welcome to all the new members that joined during the past 17 months! If you aren't yet part of WikiProject Good Articles and interested in joining WikiProject Good Articles, go here and add you name. Everyone is welcomed!

• This WikiProject, and the Good Article program as a whole, would not be where it is today without each and every one of its members! Thank you to all!

• If you haven't done so already, please remember to add your name to this list if you are still interested/active with this WikiProject. If you are no longer interested/active you don't need to add your name anywhere, you're name will be moved into a "inactive participant" list at the beginning of November. Inactive users will not receive future newsletters from this WikiProject via their talk page.

; GA Task forces

• There is currently not much going on at this time but there is a very large backlog. Until the next backlog elimination drive, please help reduce the number of nominations by reviewing articles and helping other reviewers that may need second opinions.

• Thanks to everyone who committed some time to help reduce the nominations backlog during the June-July 2012 backlog elimination drive. Most barnstars have been given out but there are still a few left. Participants that haven't gotten a barnstar yet should get it soon.

;Possible Fall/Winter 2012 Backlog Elimination Drive

• A discussion is currently being held on the WikiProject's talk page on weather another eliminations drive should take place within the next few months as the last one proved to be extremely successful. Please take the time to go to the the talk page and include your opinion on if you would be interested in taking part in a Fall/Winter 2012 elimination drive.

; Good Articles of the Month

Each month, 5 random good articles will be choose to be featured here as the good articles of the month.

• Barry (dog)
• I Love Bees
• Miles Copeland (Home and Away)
• London Country North East
• The Daily Show

| valign="http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User:Dom497/GA_Newsletter_Fall_2012" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 45%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

; Some Tips About References/Sources

Having references included in articles is one of the most important aspects to a good article, let alone Wikipedia! Without them, no one would ever know what is true and what is false and Wikipedia probably wouldn't be where it is today. So this month, I will talk about how to check for references, how reliable they are, and so on and so forth.

The first thing to do when reviewing an nominee is to do a quick scan of the article. One of the things to look for is if the article has references! If you don't see a list at the bottom of the article page, quick-fail it.Before quick-failing the article, verify that one of the several referencing templates is correctly placed at the bottom of the article. If the template is not placed, try to place it to see if references are displayed. If this proof returns no references, then proceed to quick-failing. For newcomers, quick-failing is failing an article when you spot a problem before actually conducting a full review. If you do find a list of references (and in most cases you will) make sure to look through each and every one. If you want to save some time, use [http://toolserver.org/~dispenser/view/Checklinks this tool] as it will tell you if there are any problematic references in the article you are reviewing.

Next, check the reliability and type of the references/sources. In terms of the type of reference, check to see how many primary and/or secondary sources are included. Primary sources are the ones published by the subject of the article. For example, if the subject of the article has to do with the iPhone 4s and the source is published by Apple, it is considered a primary source. Secondary sources are those not published by the subject of the article (or in close relation to it). Newspapers are examples of secondary sources and considered one of the better types to include in the article (not saying primary sources are bad). If you find that most/all of the references are primary sources, notify the nominator about this issue(s) and place the article on hold once you have completed the review. Only in the event that a secondary source can't be found as a replacement, then the primary source can remain. If there is a good mix of primary and secondary sources, that is perfect and no references need to be changed.

Now, reliability. Forums are generally not considered reliable and some blog's may not be reliable either. Newspapers, most sources published by the subject, some blogs, etc. are considered reliable. If you don't know wether the source is reliable, ask for a second opinion. For more info about how to identify wether a reference is reliable or not, visit this article.

Finally, one of the more basic things to look for is that every statement in the article has at least one reference! The only case that a statement doesn't need a reference is when it is common sense that the statement is defiantly true and/or in the case where the statement can't be challenged, as per what Wikipedia says, "All quotations and any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable published source using an inline citation."

; From the Editor

After a long 18 month hiatus, the third volume of the WikiProject Good Articles newsletter is here! Please leave any comments or feedback regarding this issue of the newsletter here or on the editors talk page.

Also, Happy Halloween...in advance!!!

PLEASE READ: If you do not wish to receive future WikiProject Good Articles newsletter's on your talk page, please remove your self from this list. If you are viewing this newsletter from the WikiProject Good Articles page or on someone else's talk page and want to receive future newsletters on your talk page, please add your name to the list linked above.

; Contributors to this Issue

• Dom497 (Editor of this Issue)

; Did You Know...

• ... that 2,100 articles have been reviewed during all backlog elimination drives combined?
• ... that out of 4,055,039 articles on Wikipedia, only 15,846 are good articles?File:Jack-o-lantern.svg
• ... that there are currently over 400 video game good articles?

;Notes

{{reflist}}

|-

| colspan="2" valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 55%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

Improving Wikipedia one article at a time since 2005!

|-

| colspan="2" valign="top" style="border: 2px #30B060 solid; padding: 1em; width: 55%; background-color: #F0FFEA;" |

{{WikiProjectGATasks|centered=yes}}

|-

| valign="top" colspan="2" style="padding: 0.5em; text-align: right; font-size: 85%; " |

|}

|}

→ Please direct all enquiries regarding this newsletter to the WikiProject talk page.
→ Newsletter delivered by ENewsBot (info) · 05:32, 3 October 2012 (UTC)

Per your earlier request on my talk page, just letting you know that the lengthy initial review at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mitt Romney/archive2 is done and the coast is clear for additional reviews. Wasted Time R (talk) 10:05, 8 October 2012 (UTC)

:Thanks, I'll have a look at it tonight. --Coemgenus (talk) 10:02, 9 October 2012 (UTC)

right

The 2012 WikiCup has come to a close; congratulations to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}}, our 2012 champion! Cwmhiraeth joins our exclusive club of previous winners: {{ul|Dreamafter}} (2007), {{ul|jj137}} (2008), {{ul|Durova}} (2009), {{ul|Sturmvogel 66}} (2010) and {{ul|Hurricanehink}} (2011). Our final standings were as follows:

1. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}}
2. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Sasata}}
3. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}}
4. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Casliber}}
5. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Muboshgu}}
6. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Miyagawa}}
7. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Ruby2010}}
8. {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Dana boomer}}

Prizes for first, second, third and fourth will be awarded, as will prizes for all those who reached the final eight. Every participant who scored in the competition will receive a ribbon of participation. In addition to the prizes based on placement, the following special prizes will be awarded based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, the prize is awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round.

• The featured article award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}}, for four featured articles in the final round.
• The good article award also goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}}, for 19 good articles in the second round.
• The list award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Muboshgu}}, for three featured lists in the final round.
• The topic award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grapple X}}, for three good topics (with around 40 articles) in round 4.
• The did you know award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}}, for well over 100 DYKs in the final round.
• The news award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|ThaddeusB}}, for 10 in the news items in round 3.
• The picture award goes to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grandiose}}, for two featured pictures in round 2.
• The reviewer award goes to both {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Ruby2010}} (14 reviews in round 1) and {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Grandiose}} (14 reviews in round 3).
• Finally, for achieving an incredible bonus point total in the final round, and for bringing the top-importance article frog to featured status, a biostar has been awarded to {{Wikipedia:WikiCup/Participant3|Cwmhiraeth}}.

Awards will be handed out in the coming days; please bear with us! This year's competition also saw fantastic contributions in all rounds, from newer Wikipedians contributing their first good or featured articles, right up to highly experienced Wikipedians chasing high scores and contributing to topics outside of their usual comfort zones. It would be impossible to name all of the participants who have achieved things to be proud of, but well done to all of you, and thanks! Wikipedia has certainly benefited from the work of this year's WikiCup participants.

Next year's WikiCup will begin in January. Currently, discussions and polls are open, and all contributions are welcome. You can also sign up for next year's competition. There will be no further newsletters this year, although brief notes may be sent out in December to remind everyone about the upcoming competition. It's been a pleasure to work with you all, and we hope to see you all in January! J Milburn (talk • email) and The ed17 (talk • email) 00:20, 1 November 2012 (UTC)

|}

|-

|

-------------------

|}

hi

I work at the Gerald Ford Presidential Library and Museum, and we are uploading materials to Wikimedia Commons. We have a number of documents that might be of interest to you - they are located at Wikimedia, Category:Documents at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum.

If you are interested in writing articles/stubs, I may be able to provide you with pictures from our archives as well. We have a limited number of artifacts, also at Wikimedia, Category:Artifacts at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library and Museum.

Let me know if I can help in any way, and please feel free to pass the word about these docs; I'd love to see some content generated around them....thanks! Bdcousineau (talk) 20:35, 16 November 2012 (UTC)

Hello Coemgenus. I have been doing work on the J. Donald Cameron article, President Grant's Secretary of War and he was U.S. Senator from Pennsylvania for nearly 20 years. Another Gilded Age politician. He was Senator during Chester A. Arthur's Administration and other Gilded Age presidents. His father was Simon Cameron, President Lincoln's Secretary of War. I believe his main source of information is the Dictionary of American Biography Volume 3 that can be found at archive.org website. Please feel free to make any edits or improve narration if you have the time or inclination. Any second opinion on the article would be good. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 08:04, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

:Sounds like a good project. I'll swing by after a while and see if I have anything to contribute. --Coemgenus (talk) 13:58, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

::Thanks Coemgenus. Cmguy777 (talk) 16:39, 19 November 2012 (UTC)

I have restructured and expanded the article on J. Donald Cameron. Possibly more could be expanded on his nearly 20 years in the Senate. A second opinion on narration would be helpful. Thanks. Cmguy777 (talk) 18:55, 22 November 2012 (UTC)

Hullo, fellow WikiProject-er. We're having a discussion about the colours of Anglicanism navboxes. Please do come along and weigh in. DBD 17:50, 30 November 2012 (UTC)

|}

|-

|

-------------------

|}

There was a Henry S. Huidekoper in command of the Hell Hawks during the Normandy invasion on D-Day in World War II. Information needs to be clarified that there are two men with this name, and a page needs to be created covering the "Henry S. Huidekoper" that commanded the Hell Hawks during World War II. The page already in existance needs to state that the "Henry S. Huidekoper" written about in apreexisting page is in fact not the person of the same name that was in command of the Hell Hawks during World War II as it is confusing when someone is looking for the "Henry S. Huidekoper" that did command the Hell Hawks. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Kargandarr (talk • contribs) 01:21, 20 December 2012 (UTC)

Hi there; you're receiving this message because you have previously shown interest in the WikiCup. This is just to remind you that the 2013 WikiCup will be starting on 1 January, and that signups will remain open throughout January. Old and new Wikipedians and WikiCup participants are warmly invited to take part in this year's competition. (Though, as a note to the more experienced participants, there have been a few small rules changes in the last few months.) If you have already signed up, let this be a reminder; you will receive a message with your submissions' page soon. Please direct any questions to the WikiCup talk page. Thanks! J Milburn 19:17, 30 December 2012 (UTC)