User talk:Bellhalla/Archive 7

Well done!

		The WikiProject Barnstar
		For your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your nomination in the 2008 "Military Historian of the Year" awards, I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar --ROGER DAVIES talk 03:55, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks. I guess 40+ DYKs, countless B-Class articles, 50+ GA articles, 4 Good Topics, 19 A-Class articles, 9 Feature Articles, largely implementing the new consensus naming style for all German U-boats, expanding the almost nonexistent coverage of Austro-Hungarian U-boats, winning the MILHIST Contest four of the six months I entered it while twice setting the monthly point total record just wasn't quite enough. ;) — Bellhalla (talk) 23:13, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

That was not lost on me either :) Part of it, I suppose, is based on visibility. Talking of which, we've got the coordinator elections coming up again soon (March). Perhaps you should consider standing. You'd be a great asset :) --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 06:26, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

FS Curie

BH: Thank you for all of your hard work. I don't "do" graphics (so no barnstar), I therefore Mention you in Dispatches for your hard work on that article. Cheers V. Joe (talk) 17:52, 14 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the kind words. But, for the sake of my curiosity, can you explain what "Dispatches" is? Many thanks. — Bellhalla (talk) 12:37, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

SS John Stagg

I've replied to your question on the AfD page as to why I think John Stagg is notable. Mjroots (talk) 14:04, 12 January 2009 (UTC)

The article has been kept. Maybe you could expand a little with the sources you mentioned in the AfD nomination. Mjroots (talk) 10:48, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary)

Hi. I am reviewing your article,SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary), for GA and have left comments at Talk:SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary)/GA1. I may be adding more comments, although reading through the article, all seems in order, except for the lead. Please do not hesitate to contact me with questions or comments. Regards, —Mattisse (Talk) 17:12, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

TfD nomination of FS1037C-related talk templates

Template:FS1037C talk and Template:FS1037C MS188 talk have been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for Deletion page. Thank you. --Eastlaw (talk) 01:40, 17 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary)

On January 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SS Milazzo

On January 18, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SS Milazzo, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 00:00, 18 January 2009 (UTC)

List of ship launches in 1946

Hi, you re-ordered the table and unbolded the ship names. The result is that this table is now completely different in apperarance to all the others. I'd have thought it better to have a consistent format across these lists. Mjroots (talk) 06:40, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Since it's a list of ships, I felt it important to, you know, actually list the ship somewhat early in the table. If the article were title "Chronological list of countries' shipyards that launched ships", the former order might make sense. As for the bold type, it is in contravention of WP:BOLD, and seems to have been added solely to emphasize the ship name as a result of the poorly thought out table design.

In my encounters with other "ships launched in XXXX" pages, they already seem to have a mish-mash of styles — some with colors, some with prose listings, etc. Perhaps this could be suggested as an example of how to format other years? — Bellhalla (talk) 07:07, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

OK, but I'm not going to reorder them all. What about the display of the country's flag by use of {{Flagicon}}? Table at the moment looks rather bland. IMO, UK ships should use the correct ensign rather than the Union Flag. Mjroots (talk) 07:37, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Does the flag materially add anything to these lists that the country name alone cannot convey? I tend to think that when they are all U.S. or UK ships (with a smattering from other countries) that the flags are being just decorative, which is exactly described in WP:ICONDECORATION.

Changing them all or not is completely up to you. I hope I my answer wasn't implying that it was your responsibility, because it surely isn't. On the contrary, we all have you to thank for taking the initiative in getting this list (and the 1947 list, as well). — Bellhalla (talk) 12:51, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

My opinion is that the flags do add to the lists, especially where a historic flag is shown which is different to the current flag, or that of a country which doesn't exist today. I know it's not my responsibility to change all the lists of ship launches, just as it't not your responsibility to create the remaining lists of windmills by county for the UK. I was merely commenting that I've got better things to do (Like finish off the Empire ships article for those whose suffix begins with A). Mjroots (talk) 14:22, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

No problems on the ship lists. It's all good :)

Speaking of the Empire ships, I inquired at the WP:Reliable sources/Noticeboard about the Mariners website that gets used in some of the Empire ships. You might be interested in the reply. The discussion is here. — Bellhalla (talk) 17:45, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I've commented re the Mariners website. I'd say that it is generally a RS, but info sometimes needs cross-referencing to ensure accuracy (shouldn't we be doing this with all sources as far as possible?). Mjroots (talk) 21:02, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I took the initiative and created 1947 when I found four ships when looking for 1946 launches. I've also found a few for 1948, but not enough to feel comfortable creating that page. Any help would be great! -MBK₀₀₄ 17:56, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I didn't mean to short-change you the credit for 1947. (I had seen your comment about creating it.) My point was that if Mjroots hadn't inquired about the 1946 list, 1947 would remain a redlink. :) — Bellhalla (talk) 17:59, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem. Also, I'm sure someone would have gotten to it eventually. I'm thinking about trying to fill in all the redlinks in the footers at the bottom for the years. -MBK₀₀₄ 18:06, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I'm working on a general {{Shipevents}} template so that there aren't separate ones for each decade. (I'm still working on a better looking template at the moment.) Right now typing this:

• {{shipevents|1946}}

produces this:

Having a general one helps to avoid situations like this, with two consecutive templates. — Bellhalla (talk) 18:12, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

That would be a great help to me as well for the redlink fill-in. Also, have you seen this nav template: {{TLS-L}}? While not ideally suited for what we would want, it may help a bit. -MBK₀₀₄ 18:17, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

I hadn't seen that before. A concern I would have would be that the ship event articles seem to go back to the 1860s or 1870s, which would make a comparable template a little bit longer. What would be ideal, but would require some additional categorization would be something like this:

The decade links could go to categories like "Ships events in the 1940s", for example.

I happened to take a look at Wikipedia:WikiProject Timeline of spaceflight/2009Format/eg and like the idea of the templates suggested for the Launch section, and feel that a comparable template could be implemented for ship launches, for example. Dang. Just what I need, another tempting reorganization project… — Bellhalla (talk) 18:58, 19 January 2009 (UTC)

Empire Ships template

I've had a go at reorganising the template to split by suffix. Please see the template talk page as I need a little help to finish it off before it can be introduced. Mjroots (talk) 10:56, 21 January 2009 (UTC)

Have you had a chance to look this over yet? Mjroots (talk) 20:53, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the delay. I've taken a look and am still pondering. Will put comments there soon. — Bellhalla (talk) 11:50, 23 January 2009 (UTC)

Your request

"Bergudi kikötőjében ismeretlen okokból elsüllyedt a 8 méteres vízben. Kiemelték, és a benne maradt egy embert még életben találták. A Danubius Hajógyárban rendbe hozták, majd átment Polába további javításra, azután próbautakat tett."

She/It (note: the sub) sunk in the port of Bergud for unknown reasons, at a point where the water was 8 meters deep. When brought to the surface a man was found inside alive. It was repaired in the Danubius shipyard, and then underwent further repairs in Pola, before taking some test trips. Hobartimus (talk) 23:06, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

Thank you so much. Or should I say "Köszönöm szépen". :) — Bellhalla (talk) 23:18, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

No problem, ask again any time. Hobartimus (talk) 23:28, 22 January 2009 (UTC)

hu:Földközi-tenger means Mediterranean Sea. The "re" at the end of the Hu version simply means to the, onto the. So the whole sentence would be "A Cattarói-öbölből a földközitengerre indult bevetésre. "From the bay of Cattaro it started to sail towards the Mediterrean Sea to see action/to begin it's mission. " The Mediterrean Sea is where most such A-H ships would go first before they can get anywhere else even more precisely it would be the Adriatic Sea. Hobartimus (talk) 00:50, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

Something new for you

		The Milhist A-Class medal with oakleaves
		For your contributions to SS Washingtonian, SS Minnesotan and SS Timothy Bloodworth, promoted to A-Class between September 2008 and January 2009, I am pleased to present you with the first-ever award of the Military history A-Class medal with Oakleaves. --ROGER DAVIES talk 15:25, 24 January 2009 (UTC)

re: Reorganization attempt

Well, I like it, but not as much as I do when it is used for spaceflights: 2008 in spaceflight. One thing, for the Caronia, she flew the British Red Ensign (File:Civil Ensign of the United Kingdom.svg) as did most Cunard and P&O liners. More tomorrow... -MBK₀₀₄ 08:07, 20 January 2009 (UTC)

No you didn't miss them, I've been pretty busy in real-life over the past week. I've got some time later today when I'll take a closer look. -MBK₀₀₄ 20:52, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

No problemo. Take your time. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:19, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

A note...

Today, I went to review SM U-69 after seeing it on the GAN page (nominated January 9), only to discover that I had already passed it to GA status on January 4. Not sure what happened there, but I'm just going to go ahead and quietly remove it from the GAN page. Dana boomer (talk) 02:02, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

OK. That was strange. It looks like it was my mistake in re-nominating it. Thanks for catching that. —

My mistake was a typo: It was to have been SM U-67 and not SM U-69 tat was nominated. I'll correct and restore the listing in the queue. — Bellhalla (talk) 13:38, 25 January 2009 (UTC)

SM U-41 (Austria-Hungary)

I have recently reviewed this article. Could you please look at the review page? ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 23:43, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I've responded on the GA review page. — Bellhalla (talk) 06:16, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at those comments. I've left one more on the page. Also, if you could either post messages on my talk page or leave a talkback template there, it would be much appreciated. Thanks, ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 21:37, 27 January 2009 (UTC)\

Yes. I've passed it, though I have to go to swim practice right now, so if you could add it to the good articles page and change the template on the talk page, that would be great. If not, I'll just do that in a few hours. ErikTheBikeMan (talk) 22:01, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

SS Mauna Loa

I replied on my talk page, sorry for the delay in responding. --Seattle Skier (talk) 18:10, 29 January 2009 (UTC)

GA review

Please visit Talk:SM U-29 (Austria-Hungary). Greetings Wandalstouring (talk) 14:03, 26 January 2009 (UTC)

I've responded on the GA review page. — Bellhalla (talk) 05:28, 27 January 2009 (UTC)

You could write a short sentences where the captains of SM U-29 (Austria-Hungary) went after being replaced. That would provide a rounded picture because you're telling what they did before taking command. It passed GA. Wandalstouring (talk) 17:13, 28 January 2009 (UTC)

None had any U-boat commands after their charge of U-29 and further biographical info (other than date of death) is absent from Uboat.net in most cases. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:49, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

SS Dzhurma

Thank you for improving the article on the SS Dzhurma; nice job.Ekem (talk) 15:44, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

My pleasure. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:47, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Re:Trivial edits with AWB

I am sorry for those edits, I was looking, and didn't see much, it appears... It was at about 0130 for me though, so you can (hopefully) partially understand, and I am sorry for the inconvenience that it caused. TARTARUS ^talk 18:41, 30 January 2009 (UTC)

Something for you (again!)

		The Military history A-Class medal with Oak Leaves
		By order of the coordinators of the Military history WikiProject, you are hereby awarded the A-Class medal with Oak Leaves for your contributions to U-1 class submarine (Austria-Hungary), U-3 class submarine (Austria-Hungary), and SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary), all promoted to A-Class in January 2009. Kirill 03:02, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Something for you (again) redux

		The Graphic Designer's Barnstar
		In gratitude, for all your hard work in designing the logo for "The Bugle", the official organ of the Military history WikiProject, I delighted to award you this Graphic designer's Barnstar. --ROGER DAVIES talk 16:48, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

PS: Where's the vanity page displaying this lot? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 16:49, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

User:Bellhalla/Awards. — Bellhalla (talk) 20:58, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

Milhist writing contest: January 2009

		The WikiChevrons
		For yet again coming first in the Milhist writing contest, for the month of January 2009, with 93 points, I award you the Military history WikiProject Chevrons. Well done, --ROGER DAVIES talk 20:54, 1 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM U-32 (Austria-Hungary)

On February 2, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM U-32 (Austria-Hungary), which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

Dravecky (talk) 07:41, 2 February 2009 (UTC)

Mare Island Naval Shipyard

According to the article, MINS is across the river from Vallejo, California. Perhaps the ships built there belong in a separate category. What do you think? -- Stepheng3 (talk) 20:34, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

That wouldn't necessarily be a bad thing. Are you talking about instead of or in addition to the Category:Ships built in Vallejo, California? I created the category and have been adding Mare Island ships to it because, for most ships built at Mare Island, the text of the articles (usually from the Dictionary of American Naval Fighting Ships) gives the location as Vallejo. — Bellhalla (talk) 20:40, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

If the sources don't distinguish, then it's hard for us to do so. Hmm. Perhaps we should rename the category to Category:Ships built in Solano County, California with a note explaining that it includes both Vallejo and MINS. - Stepheng3 (talk) 20:59, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

To clarify my remark, the text usually says something like "… built/laid down/launched/etc. at the Mare Island Naval Shipyard, Vallejo, California", in effect giving both locations. I've not come across any articles classed that were Vallejo but not MINS. In the mean time, I'm going to do is finish the list of articles for Category:Ships built in Vallejo, California, then if we decide to rename to your suggestion or perhaps Category:Ships built at the Mare Island Naval Shipyard it can be done either as a straightforward CFD or as a bot request. — Bellhalla (talk) 21:10, 3 February 2009 (UTC)

I think you're right. For now, let's leave the category where it is. I'll try to clarify the scope of the category (without renaming it). -- Stepheng3 (talk) 06:19, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

*Gulp*

Looks like I took that a bit too far. :\ Thanks for the fix! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 14:15, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ok, was it really necessary to have this edit summary? Evil, I tell you...evil. :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 07:08, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

I couldn't help it. I was channeling turn-of-the-20th-century headline writers. :) — Bellhalla (talk) 12:06, 6 February 2009 (UTC)

That's it. You've gone and done it. You've got a TPS'er now. :P

But on to serious things. I've dragged you into about 3 different drama points (SandyGeorgia's TP, Connecticut's FAC, WT:DYK).....and, well, I'm really sorry for it. :/ I owe you bucketloads of thanks for helping me through this (and with the article!), but I'm really sorry for dragging you into this. :( If there is plagiarized text in there, it wasn't my intention (but I don't think that this is any...) But I digress. Basically, thanks × infinity. —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 18:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

That it is attributed, to me, means that there was not plagiarism. While it is certainly best to not duplicate any sentences or phrases verbatim, I honestly don't see anything so unique about the phrases given as examples that they could only have come from the source. — Bellhalla (talk) 19:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Nathan F Cobb corrections

Hello Bellhalla, Please check whether I made satisfactory POV corrections in the Nathan F Cobb Shipwreck article. --Wpwatchdog (talk) 17:13, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

Shinano

I've fixed the issues. That said, be aware that someone keeps adding back in the things I delete from the page (to address your concerns). If the issues magically pop back up, just rollback/revert to the my last edit to the article - at which point it will have been addressed. Cam ^(Chat) 23:57, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXXV (January 2009)

The Military history WikiProject Newsletter Issue XXXV (January 2009)
Project news Don't forget the six-monthly Coordinator elections will take place in March for the April-September term. If you want to become more involved in the project, now's the time to start thinking about it! Upon the improvement of World War I and Alexander the Great to Featured Article, Lead Coordinator Roger Davies has pledged to donate US$250 per article to the Wikimedia Foundation. This pledge is listed at the bounty board and will expire on 31 December 2009. The two articles are both listed at the Special Projects Department as the second and ninth most frequently-read MILHIST articles. Following extensive discussion, the structure of the A-Class Medal System has been changed to include three new medals: The A-Class Medal with Oak Leaves, the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves and Swords, and the A-Class Medal with Oakleaves, Swords, and Diamonds, each of which is respectfully awarded after 5, 10, and 20 groups of three A-Class Articles. The number of our A-Class articles grew by more than 25% during this month, compared to the total number of A-Class articles existent at the end of December. Following a successful RfA, Cam has been promoted to administrator.	Articles of note New featured articles: Alaska class cruiser Bruce Kingsbury Fred Moosally Isaac Shelby Maryland and Virginia Rifle Regiment Operation Brevity Operation Uranus SS Minnesotan Stanley Goble Tetrarch (tank) USS Iowa (BB-61) USS Iowa turret explosion Woodes Rogers New featured lists: List of Second Boer War Victoria Cross recipients New featured topics: Adriatic campaign of 1807-1814 New A-Class articles: Battle of Aachen Battle of Grand Port Battle of Kaiapit Bob Chappuis Dreadnought Elmer Gedeon George Alan Vasey George Julian Howell Heinrich Bär James Newland John S. McCain, Jr. Landing at Saidor List of tanks in the Spanish Civil War M249 squad automatic weapon Military history of Australia during World War II Neil Hamilton Fairley North Yemen Civil War Operation Cobra Operation Winter Storm Operation Totalize Percy Statton Port Chicago disaster SM U-14 (Austria-Hungary) SS Timothy Bloodworth Tom Derrick U-1 class submarine (Austria-Hungary) U-3 class submarine (Austria-Hungary) William Bostock Willie Gillis Yamato class battleship
Current proposals and discussions A drive is underway to identify the core topics of World War I with the aim of improving their quality before the centenary of the start of World War I in 2014. A Survey is currently underway to determine how MilHist's processes, logistics, and management can be improved.
Awards and honors "Military historian of the Year": the winners of the gold, silver and bronze wikis are: in first place, JonCatalán; in second place, Cla68; and in joint third place, TomStar81 and Skinny87. The runners-up in alphabetical, who each receive the WikiProject Barnstar, are: Abraham, B.S., Bellhalla, Dreamafter, Durova, Ian Rose, Nick-D, Saberwyn, Woody, YellowMonkey and Ynhockey. For their work improving articles through the Military history review process during the fourth quarter of 2008, Joe N, JonCatalán, Skinny87, The_ed17, YellowMonkey, Abraham, B.S., Cam, Woody, Roger Davies, Redmarkviolinist, Jim Sweeney, and Nick-D, have been awarded the Content Review Medal. Abraham, B.S. has been awarded the WikiChevrons with Oak Leaves in recognition of his many valuable contributions to the project as an active reviewer, a thoughtful contributor to military history discussions, a fine content contributor, and a gentleman. Bellhalla has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal with Oakleaves for three ship articles: SS Washingtonian, SS Minnesotan and SS Timothy Bloodworth. He is the first editor to receive the Oakleaves. Abraham, B.S. has also been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal twice for Clarence Smith Jeffries, George Ingram, John Whittle, Harry Murray, James Newland and George Julian Howell. Cam has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal for 2nd Canadian Infantry Division, Operation Lüttich, and Yamato class battleship. JonCatalán has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal twice for Panzer IV, Third Battle of Kharkov, Tanks in the Spanish Army, Arena Active Protection System, Operation Winter Storm and List of tanks in the Spanish Civil War. Cla68 has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal for Operation Ke, Guadalcanal Campaign and USS Iowa turret explosion. Eurocopter has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal for Operation Epsom, Operation Cobra and Battle of Berlin. Hawkeye7 has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal twice for Neil Hamilton Fairley, Edmund Herring, Admiralty Islands campaign, Battle of Kaiapit, Landing at Saidor and George Alan Vasey. The_ed17 has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal for USS Nevada (BB-36), Alaska class cruiser and Lexington class battlecruiser. TonyTheTiger has been awarded the Milhist A-Class medal for Four Freedoms (Norman Rockwell), Bob Chappuis and Elmer Gedeon. The Contest department has completed its twenty second month of competition, which saw 62 entries. The top scorer this month is Bellhalla with 93 points followed by Abraham, B.S. with 52 points. Cam, Georgejdorner and 11 other editors also fielded entries. Bellhalla remains the overall leader with 687 points in total. The Chevrons go to Bellhalla and Abraham, B.S. gets the Writer's Barnstar. You are encouraged to submit any articles you are working on as entries.
To stop receiving this newsletter, or to receive it in a different format, please list yourself in the appropriate section here.

This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 02:57, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Milhist logo

Do you have time to knock up a graphic saying

_WikiProject

Military history

in the same style/typeface as the "Bugle" logo please? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 13:35, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I'll be in and out today, but that should be an easy thing to do. I'll post here when I have it. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:18, 7 February 2009 (UTC)

My apologies for not getting this sooner (I had now-resolved computer issues with PhotoShop). — Bellhalla (talk) 17:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

WikiProject
Military history

Thank you very much. I've dropped it the dummy of the next front page. I'll ask Kirill to sort the html, it's not quite right. Thanks again! --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 18:10, 9 February 2009 (UTC)

If it's not too much trouble, is there any chance of a couple of variants? The first would be to have the text in gold, rather than bronze, for maximum contrast, and the second would be having the Military history in CAPS. We're also looking to render the Milhist icon per this, but in gold. Can you help with that too? --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 17:04, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Bellhalla? We love you... ;) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 17:34, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Sure. I'll give it a whirl… — Bellhalla (talk) 17:36, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

Here are three variations covering everything(?) you wanted to see… — Bellhalla (talk) 23:23, 10 February 2009 (UTC)

(od) Thank you very much. Kirill thinks the "gold" is a bit too bright. Is there any chance you could make it darker/redder? The other small problem is that the "map" is rather blurred (perhaps it has a "glow" treatment?). Finally, and please scream if this is impossible, can the gold be rendered with highlights, like real gold, rather than a flat colour? Thanks in advance for your patience and understanding, --ROGER DAVIES ^talk 14:32, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

No worries :) Do you think you or Kirill could find an example of the shade of gold you're looking for, like maybe from List of colors or Template:Shades of yellow? That would make the color part a bit easier. (In the meantime, I'll make a guess and re-upload over the existing files.)

A problem I see with the map (and it does have an "emboss" effect on it that can be easily removed) is that being all in one color, the words/lines/shapes all blend together. I know the point of the map in this case is intended to be iconic rather than informative, but it does help to be able to tell that it is a map.

Finally, a gold metallic effect would be possible, but might take a bit longer. — Bellhalla (talk) 15:25, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

I tried the color Old Gold for the new color, and also removed the emboss effect from the map. Any thoughts on the new color? — Bellhalla (talk) 20:17, 11 February 2009 (UTC)

Template:Shipevents

Is it possible to alter the template so that it shows +/- 5 years instead of +/- 4 years? Mjroots (talk) 13:43, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

Done. — Bellhalla (talk) 14:44, 15 February 2009 (UTC)

GAN of Minas Gerais

Already?!? :) I know that I have to write a lead; I will get to it tomorrow. Thanks! —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 04:57, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Don't worry, I've already failed it for that reason alone.... ;) — Bellhalla (talk) 05:03, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

Evil. Pure evil. Yes, I am talking about you. :) —Ed 17 ^{(Talk / Contribs)} 05:08, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I'm going to hold off reviewing until the expansion and cleanup tags are removed. (Technically, a cleanup tag is grounds for a quick fail.) Also, the Talk page doesn't have the {{GA nominee}} info on it. — Bellhalla (talk) 06:37, 16 February 2009 (UTC)

I think it is safe to review the article now. I didn't see any expansion or cleanup tags on it, and I just looked. -MBK₀₀₄ 05:29, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Ah. Thanks for that. I thought I'd added the article to my watch list but apparently hadn't… — Bellhalla (talk) 05:33, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SM U-30 (Austria-Hungary)

The article SM U-30 (Austria-Hungary) you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . It hasn't failed because it's basically a good article, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needed to be addressed. If these are fixed within seven days, the article will pass, otherwise it will fail. See Talk:SM U-30 (Austria-Hungary) for things needed to be addressed. Abraham, B.S. (talk) 00:14, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Everything looks fine, so I have just gone and passed it. Cheers, Abraham, B.S. (talk) 05:55, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

GAN for SM U-31 (Austria-Hungary)

I've reviewed the article and left notes on the talk page. I've put the nomination on hold for seven days to allow the issues to be addressed. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, here, or on the article talk page with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:58, 17 February 2009 (UTC)

Ju 87

I thought the citations were the strongest point! I thought I would have trouble with all the others! Given that I have most of the books given I can sort this out. I'll cover everything. Dapi89 (talk) 23:05, 18 February 2009 (UTC)

Please see my comments on the GA board. Dapi89 (talk) 00:37, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your help. I will take your comments on board and do as you have suggested when I figure out how best to tackle the points raised. I will nominate if for FA - but I'm not sure I would like it to be torn appart! Dapi89 (talk) 17:08, 19 February 2009 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of SM U-17 (Austria-Hungary)

The article SM U-17 (Austria-Hungary) you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:SM U-17 (Austria-Hungary) for eventual comments about the article. Well done! Abraham, B.S. (talk) 04:40, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-42

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-42, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:46, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-43

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-43, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-44

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-44, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:47, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-45

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-45, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-46

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-46, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:48, 20 February 2009 (UTC)

DYK for SM UB-47

On February 20, 2009, Did you know? was updated with a fact from the article SM UB-47, which you created or substantially expanded. If you know of another interesting fact from a recently created article, then please suggest it on the Did you know? talk page.

--Dravecky (talk) 11:49, 20 February 2009 (UTC)