User talk:Renamed user df576567etesddf/Archive 10

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Congrats

wishing you all the best. Babakathy (talk) 09:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much, and a very Happy New Year to you. —Cliftonian (talk) 15:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I say!

Looking in here to solicit your input at a peer review, I see and rejoice at the enchanting picture of your wedding day. Permit me to offer my congratulations and best wishes. I shall not be bothering you with my PR: you will have better things to do. My respectful greetings to you and Mrs Asher. Ever thine, Tim riley (talk) 15:45, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the lovely note Tim, Mrs Asher and I liked it very much (well, she didn't really understand, but I gave her the gist of it in Hebrew, then she liked it very much). I will be slightly less active on here for a while as you inferred. Good luck with the PR and a Happy New Year to you! —Cliftonian (talk) 15:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)
I was attracted by Milhist congratulations, but find you deserve even more for peaceful family history! Precious! - to keep it simple for Dalia ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 23:45, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

SADF casualties in Rhodesia?

You seem to have a lot of knowledge regarding the Rhodesian Bush War. The South African Defence Force was directly involved on the Rhodesian side, mainly through its air force and paratroopers. I find it likely that the South Africans suffered some casualties due to their involvement in the war, but I have yet to find any figures even attempting to illuminate this. Do you know anything about the SADF role apart from what is already stated in the article? Best, --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 17:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)

I am on honeymoon right now so for now I am unable to look into this in great depth and most of this answer is just off the top of my head, I am sorry. I'm afraid I do not have a total figure for SADF casualties in the war either but I don't believe the number would be very high. Most of SA's support comprised supplies, materiel etc; SADF personnel in Rhodesia were generally advisers at the Rhodesian military HQ, airmen (prominently helicopter pilots and technicians) or paratroop instructors (indeed in some cases Rhodesian parachutists were trained in South Africa itself). Rhodesian air casualties were very low as ZIPRA did not achieve the ability to seriously challenge aerial targets until the war's latter stages (about 1978) and ZANLA never did. I do know off the top of my head there were two SAAF personnel, a pilot and a technician both called van Rensburg, injured in the helicopter crash that killed Col Dave Parker of the RLI at Christmas 1975; the technician died and the pilot was seriously wounded. The SAP (South African Police) took part in Rhodesian north-eastern border patrols (in what later became the Hurricane operational area) as early as the late 1960s, following Operation Nickel in 1967, but Rhodesian casualties during this period were minimal and I doubt the numbers were high.
Anyway all in all I do not have a source for a figure either but I would estimate the number of SADF troops killed in Rhodesia was probably very low. I would be surprised it was more than a couple dozen at the very highest. I am not including South Africans who joined the Rhodesian forces as regular recruits (there were many). I will let you know if I find something more concrete on this, but I hope this helps for now. All the best and Happy New Year —Cliftonian (talk) 16:17, 3 January 2014 (UTC)
Please forgive the intrusion, Cliftonian, but if it helps I do recall that five SAP constables were shot and killed by guerrillas at the Mazoe River on December 23, 1974. Besides being a much-publicized event in Rhodesia, it scored headlines in SA due to an ongoing ceasefire then mediated by Bishop Muzerowa. Anyroad, Happy New Year to you.
Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 02:25, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for this Katangais, I expect this may be helpful to mikro —Cliftonian (talk) 09:10, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
(talk page stalker) Congratulations on your marriage! Nick-D (talk) 10:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much Nick! Very much appreciated. And a Happy New Year to you. —Cliftonian (talk) 10:33, 4 January 2014 (UTC)
I would like to make a complete figure or an estimation of SADF casualties in Rhodesia, so any help is appreciated. And congratulations on your marriage! :) --Mikrobølgeovn (talk) 01:22, 5 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks; as I said before I will let you know if I come across a figure. Keep well, Happy New Year and have a great week —Cliftonian (talk) 11:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 01 January 2014

Featured topic listing

Hi Cliftonian,

I have a featured topic nomination for a featured topic on Belgium in World War II (of which the Belgian Congo article you very kindly reviewed) and would really welcome your comments! All the best Brigade Piron (talk) 16:51, 7 January 2014 (UTC)

On it sir —Cliftonian (talk) 13:11, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

Congratulations!

The WikiProject Barnstar
I am delighted to present you with this WikiProject Barnstar in recognition of your extensive contributions to the Military history WikiProject, as evidenced by your being nominated for the 2013 "Military historian of the Year" award. We're grateful for your help and look forward to seeing more of your excellent work in the coming year. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 23:13, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much! —Cliftonian (talk) 13:11, 10 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 January 2014

Your GA nomination of Ian Smith

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Ian Smith you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- Lemurbaby (talk) 05:20, 12 January 2014 (UTC)

  • congratulations on your wedding! Beautiful photo. I wish you both a lifetime of happiness and joy. Best wishes! - Lemurbaby (talk) 03:16, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Air Rhodesia Flight 825 to FA status recently. If you would like to see this (or any other FA you may have helped to write) appear as "Today's featured article" soon, please nominate it at the requests page; if you'd like to see an FA on a particular date in the next year or so, please add it to the "pending" list. In the absence of a request, the article may end up being picked at any time (although with 1,329 articles in Category:Featured articles that have not appeared on the main page at present, there's no telling how long – or short! – the wait might be). If you'd got any TFA-related questions or problems, please let me know. BencherliteTalk 17:06, 13 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note! I will do that. =) —Cliftonian (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Caesar Hull

Hi Cliftonian. I've noticed that you have a sandbox with the beginnings of an article on Caesar Hull. If and when you launch that article into mainspace, I have some info and a couple of photos relating to his service in Norway. Just thought I'd let you know. Congratulations on the wedding. Manxruler (talk) 21:15, 15 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the nudge, I will try to get this into mainspace at some point over the next few days; if you like feel free to add things to the sandbox draft while I get it ready. And thanks! —Cliftonian (talk) 15:36, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Absolutely no stress, though. Just thought I'd mention it. Sure, I'll see what I can add. Manxruler (talk) 16:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)
Thanks for the notice. I've been looking through my personal library the last few days, and I think I have quite a bit to add. Will get at it tonight or tomorrow. Cheers. Manxruler (talk) 00:17, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm presently working on the article. Would you be so kind as to include me in the DYK credits? Manxruler (talk) 02:23, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I'd be honoured. Thank you very much for your additions, they are excellent. —Cliftonian (talk) 09:48, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
Thank you. There are more to come, photos too. On that matter, I have some quotes by others about Hull. Do you think we could somehow use them in the article? I'm thinking about Template:Pquote or something like that. Manxruler (talk) 13:07, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I see no reason why not; we can do it either that way or just in the prose (if there are a lot we could set up a section called "Character and reputation" or something, before the "memorials" section). Do you have a photo of the memorial at Bodø? That would be great for the "memorials" section. —Cliftonian (talk) 13:20, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
I'll give it a try. I'm sure we'll figure out a sensible way of using the quotes. I do have a photo of the memorial, and I'll find it and upload it today. Manxruler (talk) 13:26, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
"Wizard!" —Cliftonian (talk) 13:28, 25 January 2014 (UTC)
There we are. It took a lot of searching to find that photo in my archives, turns out that even though I've passed by that monument probably dozens of times the last five or so years, I've only photographed it once. Manxruler (talk) 20:44, 25 January 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCIV, January 2014

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 Nick-D (talk) 13:46, 16 January 2014 (UTC)

Precious again

defense forces
Thank you for quality articles for project military history, especially on Rhodesia, such as Rhodesian mission in Lisbon, for excellent reviewing, for being "happy to receive correspondence" - you are an awesome Wikipedian!

--Gerda Arendt (talk) 11:58, 17 January 2013 (UTC)

A year ago, you were the 368th recipient of my PumpkinSky Prize, - keep defense forceful ;) --Gerda Arendt (talk) 09:27, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

=) =)—Cliftonian (talk) 10:14, 17 January 2014 (UTC)
I tried here, "... and give you peace", --Gerda Arendt (talk) 10:47, 17 January 2014 (UTC)

Long time!

Hi old friend! How have you been? I hope all is well with you and your wife, congratulations again! Too much time has past since we last worked together.

It's been some time since I last put in a major effort to promote some articles. I've been fairly busy at university the last semester so I've mostly done day to day updates and minor edits to the articles on my watchlist. I'm going to write my master thesis this semester but I will hopefully have more time to do some writing here as well, since I don't have to be at university for 8-9 hours a day like last semester. My next goal is to get Malmö IP to GA status, and then most likely History of Malmö FF to GA (which will require a lot of time and effort). If you have the time and are willing, would you look at Malmö IP and give me some suggestion on how to proceed? I believe it's fairly close to GA standards, it needs more references and a fair bit of copy editing. I might change the layout of the article, the stadium wasn't used much at all between the 1960's and the 1990's so perhaps the first section should be Early history (1890's – 1950's) and the latter section Later history (1960's – present day). I've tried separating the sections about football and athletics but it overlaps at some points into the other two history sections.

Don't hesitate to tell me if you don't have time, you're the best copy editor out there that I have worked with so I would very much appreciate if you would be willing to work with me again! --Reckless182 (talk) 14:17, 18 January 2014 (UTC)

Jakob! My man, how are you? Things here are good, thanks! Yes you are right it has been too long. Good timing also—as you may have noticed I have just finished a period of very heavy work on the Ian Smith article and a bit of football always provides a very welcome change of pace. So, yes, I will be delighted to lend a hand on these.
The Malmö IP looks pretty solid and at least close to GA standard from a very cursory first glance (the major issue I see is quite a few places where we need references) but I will take a more detailed look over the next couple of days and post some comments on the talk page; then we'll move on towards GA. I think a reconstruction along the lines you suggest would be good as the narrative in the History section presently jumps around a bit in terms of time and context. I would try to rearrange it so the progression of the prose fits better with the progression of the years, rather than constantly jumping backwards and forwards. (That is not to say simply to re-merge the football and athletics sections, as these two bits seem generally okay, but I would consider moving the bits in the latter section referring to the 1990s and later down, as it seems rather jarring to refer to such recent events and then rewind all the way to 1938).
History of Malmö FF will take quite a bit of work but the pay-off would be very satisfying, I think, particularly as we have a lot of high quality pictures to illustrate the club story.
I'll get on the Malmö IP article over the next couple days and post some comments to get the proverbial ball rolling. I'm really rather flattered that you hold such a high opinion of me. Good luck with the articles, I will give all the help I can! Keep well now, —Cliftonian (talk) 17:18, 18 January 2014 (UTC)
I'm glad to hear that everything is good at your end! I'm doing well too.
The Ian Smith article looks like an impressive piece of work, you must've spent some time on that one? Glad to hear that you have some time for some football related articles. As I said earlier, I very much appreciate your help!
As you may have noticed, I did some reorganizing layout-wise for the Malmö IP article. I also added quite a bit of content for the later history section. My main issue when it comes to references is that the majority of the references for this article is taken from a book that was written in 1996, other sources are also quite hard to come by. Since the stadium went through an extensive renovation in 1999 after the book was written I'm finding it hard to find references that tells me about this period of time. I'm also quite confused as to at what period the ladies division of Malmö FF (named Malmö FF Dam between 1970–2007 and LdB FC Malmö between 2007–2013, presently named FC Rosengård) played at Malmö IP. Some sources suggest that they moved from Malmö Stadion to Malmö IP in 2006 when they became independent from Malmö FF. However according to the Swedish FA match directory (Which goes back to 2001) I can clearly see that they have played at Malmö IP since at least 2001. This brings me to a "rational guess" that they moved to Malmö IP in connection with it's renovation in 1999, and has played there since. However, I've also seen images of them at Malmö IP in the 1980's so I cannot be entirely sure. This should be clarified in the prose, the information in the infobox is more problematic.
Thanks! --Reckless182 (talk) 13:55, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
Well, unfortunately this is often the case for sources on women's football because it is much less prominent than men's. It's possible that they moved permanently and/or formally to Malmö IP in 2006 (or 2001), having played there previously in a less official capacity or sporadically. You can get around issues with the infobox by doing a footnote, like this:
{{#tag:ref|FC Rosengard women's team did this and this and something else happened etc|group="n"|name="rosengarddam"}}}}
You can put references in the text field here as normal. Then you put this in the references section as a "footnotes" section:
{{reflist|group=n}}
And you're good to go. I hope this helps. I will continue my look over the article as a whole over the next few days. I am sorry about the delay, there was stuff happening off wiki. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:59, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

D'Olly

FYI, the GA review has opened here. Thankfully, we've got a good reviewer. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:53, 19 January 2014 (UTC)

And while I remember, Abe is now at FAC here, and any further comments would be gratefully received if you have the inclination! Sarastro1 (talk) 18:12, 20 January 2014 (UTC)
I have supported there, well done! Sorry it took me a few days, I was required somewhere without easy web access. I will watch the GA review and help out where and when. I have been reflecting on the matter of a fair use image of D'Olly for the top of the article and I think we might be able to get away with one on the grounds that the affair revolved entirely around him. Perhaps ask the reviewer what he thinks? Anyway hope you are well and look forward to working on this more, I would be really proud to help get this article to FA. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:23, 22 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 January 2014

Welcome to the 2014 WikiCup!

Hello Cliftonian, and welcome to the 2014 WikiCup! Your submission page can be found here. The competition began on 1 January. There have been a few small changes from last year; the rules can be read in full at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Scoring, and the page also includes a summary of changes. One important rule to remember is that only content on which you have completed significant work, and nominated, in 2014 is eligible for points in the competition- the judges will be checking! As ever, this year's competition includes some younger editors. If you are a younger editor, you are certainly welcome, but we have written an advice page at Wikipedia:WikiCup/Advice for younger editors for you. Please do take a look. Any questions should be directed to one of the judges, or left on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup. Signups will close at the end of January, and the first round will end on 26 February; the 64 highest scorers at that time will make it to round 2. Good luck! J Milburn (talk · contribs), The ed17 (talk · contribs) and Miyagawa (talk · contribs) 17:21, 20 January 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 January 2014

Caesar Hull

Not a problem. Happy to help. Dapi89 (talk) 15:49, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Caesar Hull

Orlady (talk) 16:02, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

WikiCup 2014 January newsletter

The 2014 WikiCup is off to a flying start, with, at time of writing, 138 participants. The is the largest number of participants we have seen since 2010. If you are yet to join the competition, don't worry- the judges have agreed to keep the signups open for a few more days. By a wide margin, our current leader is newcomer Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), whose set of 14 featured pictures, the first FPs of the competition, was worth 490 points. Here are some more noteworthy scorers:

Featured articles, featured lists, featured topics and featured portals are yet to play a part in the competition. The judges have removed a number of submissions which were deemed ineligible. Typically, we aim to see work on a project, followed by a nomination, followed by promotion, this year. We apologise for any disappointment caused by our strict enforcement this year; we're aiming to keep the competition as fair as possible.

Wikipedians interested in friendly competition may be interested to take part in The Core Contest; unlike the WikiCup, The Core Contest is not about audited content, but, like the WikiCup, it is about article improvement; specifically, The Core Contest is about contribution to some of Wikipedia's most important article. Of course, any work done for The Core Contest, if it leads to a DYK, GA or FA, can earn WikiCup points.

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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! 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), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 19:54, 1 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 January 2014

Profumo affair

Hi. As a change from my normal comfort zone of music and literature, I have been exploring the murky world of political scandal. The Profumo affair was a big deal here in the 1960s; it may have helped to defeat a government that had help power for 13 years. Anyway, if your duties permit I'd be very pleased if you could comment at the peer review. Brianboulton (talk) 21:58, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

PS: Congratulations on your recent wedding! Brianboulton (talk) 22:00, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Thank you very much! I read through the article earlier and found a couple small grammatical typos but nothing more. I had a cursory knowledge of what the Profumo affair was from my general knowledge of British political history, but not much in the way of specific details, so it was interesting to see the whole affair covered so well (as I have become used to where you are concerned). I am presently dedicating myself to a grand review of the Peru football team article to try to drag it up to FA status, and this is taking up a lot of my wiki-time; I might take a few days to get to Profumo but I will in time, don't worry. (If I'm honest the article looks good enough already that I don't think you really need me!) Anyway, I hope you are well and having a good start to 2014; thank you very much for the heads up and I look forward to taking part in the peer review. —Cliftonian (talk) 16:38, 3 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Ian Smith

The article Ian Smith you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Ian Smith for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Lemurbaby -- Lemurbaby (talk) 13:32, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Huzzah! —Cliftonian (talk) 13:34, 8 February 2014 (UTC)

Jack William Pithey

Hi Cliftonian! SInce you have done work with Rhodesia-related articles, is there any chance you may have a sources for Jack William Pithey's date of death? – Connormah (talk) 21:24, 9 February 2014 (UTC)

Hi Connormah! Please call me John. I haven't been able to find an exact date for you sadly—Oxford DNB says he died in 1987 but unfortunately does not give a date. I have put this in the article. If I find an exact date I will add it to the article. Cheers! —Cliftonian (talk) 17:52, 10 February 2014 (UTC)
Sigh, see the article talk page. A certain editor has been reverting the inclusion of the 1987 year for a couple years now (just look at the history and you'll see)... – Connormah (talk) 20:35, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Caesar Hull

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Caesar Hull you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 09:32, 10 February 2014 (UTC)

Profumo affair

Brief courtesy message to let you know that Profumo is now at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 17:55, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

I may not be able to get to this for a few days, but I will be there; thanks for the note —Cliftonian (talk) 20:13, 12 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 February 2014

Your GA nomination of Caesar Hull

The article Caesar Hull you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Caesar Hull for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Zawed -- Zawed (talk) 08:32, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

Woo —Cliftonian (talk) 11:37, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Peru Barnstar of National Merit

The Peru Barnstar of National Merit
Per the guidelines of Wikiproject Peru, and for the major copy-editing work done at the article Peru national football team, you are hereby awarded Peru's National Merit Barnstar. Congratulations!
Regardless how the FAC nomination ends this time, it is clear that your major copy-editing work has made the article into a true work of art. I hope to have the pleasure of working with you again in the near future.--MarshalN20 | Talk 14:27, 14 February 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much for this; I am very glad that you are so happy with my contributions to the article. I also look forward to working together soon. If ever there is some way I can lend a hand, I am always more than happy to do so. Have a great weekend, and thanks again! —Cliftonian (talk) 14:29, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
I was browsing user's profiles, I stumbled across yours. I was very impressed. Dutch Ninja (talk) 08:02, 19 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 February 2014

Your GA nomination of Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics you nominated for GA-status according to the criteria. This process may take up to 7 days. Feel free to contact me with any questions or comments you might have during this period. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 23:32, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Arthur Gould (rugby union) at FAC

Hey Cliftonian. You may remember giving many valuable comments at a peer review for Arthur Gould (rugby union) a few months ago. Just letting you know we have taken the article to FAC (you can see the nom here). Good luck with Ian Smith btw -- it's impressively researched. -- Shudde talk 23:07, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

I'd of course be delighted to have a look at some point during the next few days. Thanks for the note and good luck! =) —Cliftonian (talk) 15:12, 23 February 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCV, February 2014

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 Nick-D (talk) 23:52, 22 February 2014 (UTC)

Your GA nomination of Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics

The article Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics for comments about the article. Well done! Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Seabuckthorn -- Seabuckthorn (talk) 01:42, 24 February 2014 (UTC)

DYK for Zimbabwe women's national field hockey team at the 1980 Summer Olympics

The DYK project (nominate) 11:06, 25 February 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 February 2014

D'Olly update

We've just passed GA, and we had a good reviewer, so that is something. I've currently got Bobby Peel at PR, and he is probably going to be my next FAC attempt. After that, I'll put D'Olly at PR, and off we go! Incidentally, the GA reviewer had no issues with the image of D'Olly, and the Profumo Affair recently passed at FAC with a fair use image of the main protagonist; the issue was raised and consensus was that it was OK to include, so we should be OK. Sarastro1 (talk) 09:04, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

How extraordinary; I was just about to leave a note on your talk page saying congratulations! I am presently also rather occupied with the Ian Smith FAC, so a break before we start the final approach with D'Olly would be good for me as well. I will pop in at Bobby Peel but from first glance it looks to be in very good shape so I don't expect to find much to quibble about. I agree regarding the fair use image of Basil; I expect it will be all right. I will continue looking around for pictures we might use elsewhere in the article. Cheers and I hope you're well; have a great weekend —Cliftonian (talk) 09:17, 28 February 2014 (UTC)


WikiCup 2014 February newsletter

And so ends the most competitive first round we have ever seen, with 38 points required to qualify for round 2. Last year, 19 points secured a place; before that, 11 (2012) or 8 (2011) were enough. This is both a blessing and a curse. While it shows the vigourous good health of the competition, it also means that we have already lost many worthy competitors. Our top three scorers were:

  1. Smithsonian Institution Godot13 (submissions), a WikiCup newcomer whose high-quality scans of rare banknotes represent an unusual, interesting and valuable contribution to Wikipedia. Most of Godot's points this round have come from a large set of pictures used in Treasury Note (1890–91).
  2. Oh, better far to live and die / Under the brave black flag I fly... Adam Cuerden (submissions), a WikiCup veteran and a finalist last year, Adam is also a featured picture specialist, focusing on the restoration of historical images. This month's promotions have included a carefully restored set of artist William Russell Flint's work.
  3. United States WikiRedactor (submissions), another WikiCup newcomer. WikiRedactor has claimed points for good article reviews and good articles relating to pop music, many of which were awarded bonus points. Articles include Sky Ferreira, Hannah Montana 2: Meet Miley Cyrus and "Wrecking Ball" (Miley Cyrus song).

Other competitors of note include:

After such a competitive first round, expect the second round to also be fiercely fought. Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 1 but before the start of round 2 can be claimed in round 2, but please do not update your submission page until March (UTC). Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points equally.

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. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to help keep down the review backlogs! 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), The ed17 (talk • email) and Miyagawa (talk • email) 00:01, 1 March 2014 (UTC)

DYK for D'Oliveira affair

The DYK project (nominate) 08:03, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Gi' me t'ball, Mr Stoddart. Ah'll get t'buggers out before lunch

Just to let you know that Mr Peel is now at FAC. The review is here if you wish to comment further. (Incidentally, sort-of-congratulations on the D'Olly DYK. A little bizarre and unexpected, but there you go!) Sarastro1 (talk) 19:35, 5 March 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the note. Sort-of-congratulations too re: the DYK (I didn't nominate it either, but hey ho, was a nice surprise as you say). Keep well; great work again on Peel. —Cliftonian (talk) 19:32, 6 March 2014 (UTC)

John Gielgud

I have put the John Gielgud article up for peer review, and if you have time and inclination to comment there, you will have the gratitude of Tim riley (talk) 13:05, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Of course —Cliftonian (talk) 13:35, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

(test) The Signpost: 05 March 2014

Main Page appearance: Shangani Patrol

This is a note to let the main editors of Shangani Patrol know that the article will be appearing as today's featured article on March 18, 2014. If this article needs any attention or maintenance, it would be preferable if that could be done before its appearance on the Main Page. If you prefer that the article appear as TFA on a different date, or not at all, please ask Bencherlite (talk · contribs). You can view the TFA blurb at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/March 18, 2014. If it needs tweaking, or if it needs rewording to match improvements to the article between now and its main page appearance, please edit it, following the instructions at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/requests/instructions. The blurb as it stands now is below:

Major Allan Wilson

On 4 December 1893, the Shangani Patrol, comprising 34 soldiers of the British South Africa Company, was annihilated by over 3,000 Matabele warriors during the First Matabele War, in Rhodesia (modern-day Zimbabwe). Major Patrick Forbes was attempting to capture the Matabele King Lobengula. A patrol, headed by Major Allan Wilson (pictured) was scouting ahead on the north side of the Shangani River. When Wilson's patrol moved in to capture Lobengula, it was ambushed by Matabele riflemen and warriors near the king's wagon. Surrounded and outnumbered about a hundred-fold, the patrol made a last stand as three of its number rode back to the river for reinforcements – without success as the Shangani was now in flood and Forbes was also involved in a skirmish. After fighting to the last cartridge, and killing over ten times their own number, Wilson and his men were annihilated. The patrol's members were regarded as national heroes for endeavour in the face of insurmountable odds. The anniversary of the battle became an annual public holiday in Rhodesia in 1895, and was an official non-work day until 1920. A film depicting the episode, Shangani Patrol, was released in 1970. (Full article...)

UcuchaBot (talk) 23:01, 10 March 2014 (UTC)

Precious again, --Gerda Arendt (talk) 05:09, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 March 2014

Hockey etc

Nice article on the hockey, I've commented at the FAC. Regarding D'Olly, I'm pottering on another biography at the moment, and hope to put the D'Olly article up at PR towards the end of next week. And hopefully FAC shortly after that! Sarastro1 (talk) 11:53, 15 March 2014 (UTC)

Sounds good. If there's anything I can help with at all please let me know. Cheers and have a nice Sunday —Cliftonian (talk) 14:03, 15 March 2014 (UTC)
On the subject of the hockey team, I'll be pleased to add my comments to the FAC shortly. I've been away for a short while, so it may take me a couple of days as I have some catching-up to do. If you have the time and inclination to look at it, I've just nominated Imogen Holst at peer review and will welcome any comments and suggestions. Brianboulton (talk) 21:29, 17 March 2014 (UTC)
Of course, I will have a look at Imogen either tonight or over the next few days. Hope you're well and had a nice trip. =) —Cliftonian (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Collages and Articles

Hi Cliftonian,

Taking a cue from the Vietnam War and Korean War articles, I thought it would be a good idea to upload a collage to the Namibian War of Independence page to substitute the infobox map, a precedent which - if successful - I was hoping could work well on the South African Border War and Rhodesian Bush War articles. After uploading the initial gallery, the image was tagged for deletion, per the following reason:

Contextual significance. Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding.

The collage contained two images which were non-free but I argued would work per this file: File:Rhodesian reservists on patrol.jpg; they represent well-known but irreplaceable content without which I felt any article on the topic would be sorely lacking. So, now that I've been well and truly knocked off my high horse, I thought you might be able to make a constructive contribution. Does the 'collage' theme work better than a map? Do you think it significantly increases the reader's contextual significance of the main topic? Is it something that would work well in related articles?

Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 21:54, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

Hi Katangais, how are you? Nice to hear from you. I agree that the collage idea is a good one for the reasons you give but unfortunately I do not think we can use these non-free images in the collage—the rules surrounding non-free articles are pretty tight and frustratingly it is hard to get them through. Either the image itself must be the subject of commentary in the text, or the image must depict something that cannot be described using text. That image of the Rhodesian reservists should not strictly be on here as free alternatives probably exist; that it has avoided deletion until now can be attributed to the fact that Rhodesian articles don't get high traffic so few will have investigated the copyright status of the image. (It is of course unlikely that anybody would make a copyright claim regarding the picture but so far as I know proper procedure on WP is to not make such assumptions.)
Regarding constructive answers and steps: Yes, I agree that this idea is better than a map and would work well in the other articles. I think that there is a case for keeping the Cassinga Victims image as it really "speaks a thousand words" and hugely increases the reader's understanding of the subject, but I don't think we can say the same about the other fair use image, the "SWAPO PLAN", which frankly just shows some guys with AKs walking in the bush. If I were you I would push to keep the Cassinga picture but I don't think you have such a solid case for the other one. I hope this is all helpful; if there's anything else I can lend a hand with please let me know. Keep well and good luck! —Cliftonian (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)
Lekker as always, Cliftonian - thanks for asking. I'll be staying near Pretoria this July and will make more inquiries, both to institutions and individuals, about Rhodesian or SADF photographs there. Anyway, I'm pleased that you agree with the collage idea in principle, especially since I was looking at arranging a similar one for Rhodesian Bush War. The SWAPO PLAN image was added because it is a low-quality image of PLAN fighters in the bush during the '70s and uncredited. Most of the images of PLAN in the field were taken in the late '80s by professional photographers and copyrighted to specific journalists/organisations - this is the only exception I've seen.
It is frustrating that the conflicts in Namibia and Zim received a great deal of media documentation but the copyright laws of regimes within RSA's Roman-Dutch sphere are so maddeningly vague - due to copyright paranoia even national coat of arms here on the Wiki were temporarily removed when somebody found a loophole. Most related wartime images we have here are either non-free or provided by the kindness of vets, who are getting fewer in number with each passing generation.
Thanks, --Katangais (talk) 23:01, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

FA congratulations again...

Just a quick note to congratulate you on the promotion of Ian Smith to FA status recently. I know you know all about WP:TFAR and the "pending" list, so this is just a reminder to use them as and when suits you. Many thanks. BencherliteTalk 22:34, 17 March 2014 (UTC)

  • Cheers Bencherlite; I will do. I am saving most of the Rhodesian-related ones for specific dates and will nominate them in time. —Cliftonian (talk) 18:48, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

Congrats on the main page appearance

Beautiful work on the Shangani Patrol article, and thank you again for bringing an important African history topic to the main page! - Lemurbaby (talk) 07:45, 18 March 2014 (UTC)

D'Olly is go

As you've probably seen, I've been polishing over the last few days. I've now put it up at PR here. Let's see what happens! I'll ping a few people for comments. Sarastro1 (talk) 11:12, 22 March 2014 (UTC)

There is a query on the PR page about the "Winds of Change" speech; I think that is more your area of expertise than mine. If you have anything you can add as a note to that, I'd be grateful. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:19, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
Hi Sarastro, I'm sorry for the delay but I have had a very busy few days in a place with access only on my cell phone and no books, desk etc. I had seen the point on the phone but cannot do anything on it until later today when I should be back. Thanks for the note and for your patience. Sorry again! Cheers —Cliftonian (talk) 05:22, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Fantastic! Thanks for that. Also, I've reverted the lead alteration as I stated in the PR: they were basically the same thing and naming them separately like that would be a little misleading to non sad-fanatics-who-actually-understand-and-care-for-the-difference like me! Sarastro1 (talk) 20:09, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
I think everyone is done now, and Giants2008 has also had a look without finding any issues. Assuming no-one else chips in, and there are no follow-ups, I'll take this to FAC either tomorrow night or on Saturday. Sarastro1 (talk) 20:38, 27 March 2014 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 March 2014

Singing in the Abbey

May I pick your brains? At the John Gielgud PR the question has been raised whether his attendance at lots of services at the Abbey was as a member of the choir or, alternatively, did/do Westminster boys get herded into the Abbey for services whether they're in the choir or not? Hope all is well with you. Tim riley (talk) 17:18, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll post a little note on this in the PR itself for everybody's convenience. I'm very well, thanks for asking. —Cliftonian (talk) 17:37, 23 March 2014 (UTC)
Superb! Thank you so much. I don't envy you the Westminster Latin; I found ordinary Latin quite hard enough without extra bells and whistles. I do, on the other hand, envy you your regular attendance at the Abbey. My school doubled as the Cathedral choir school in Liverpool, and I think that Liverpool Cathedral is a modern wonder, but I must admit the Abbey does rather trump most aces. Tim riley (talk) 20:49, 23 March 2014 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue XCVI, March 2014

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 Nick-D (talk) 12:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

Imogen Holst FAC

Just letting the faithful peer-reviewers know that I've nominated IH at FAC. Brianboulton (talk) 21:28, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

will be there —Cliftonian (talk) 21:58, 26 March 2014 (UTC)

A barnstar for you!

The Editor's Barnstar
For a great new starter article on P. K. Le Roux. How did he not have one in the first place!? Cassiantotalk 21:52, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Btw, is he really 110 years old this year? Cassiantotalk 21:54, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Thank you very much! No he died in 1985 but can't find an RS for that so left it hidden. —Cliftonian (talk) 21:57, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Surprisingly difficult to find a RS my end too. I left a suggestion on his TP for a possible image. Cassiantotalk 22:32, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=User_talk:Renamed_user_df576567etesddf/Archive_10&oldid=1141986156"