Articles you might like to edit, from SuggestBot edit
SuggestBot predicts that you will enjoy editing some of these articles. Have fun!
SuggestBot picks articles in a number of ways based on other articles you've edited, including straight text similarity, following wikilinks, and matching your editing patterns against those of other Wikipedians. It tries to recommend only articles that other Wikipedians have marked as needing work. Your contributions make Wikipedia better -- thanks for helping.
If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please tell me on SuggestBot's talk page. Thanks from ForteTuba, SuggestBot's caretaker.
P.S. You received these suggestions because your name was listed on the SuggestBot request page. If this was in error, sorry about the confusion. -- SuggestBot (talk) 04:45, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Hearts (strategy) edit
While it's a pretty blatant violation of WP:NOT#GUIDE, that's not a category for speedy deletion. I've prodded it instead. --Orange Mike | Talk 19:12, 1 May 2008 (UTC)
Lady Aleena's future edit
|
The ed17...Several people have expressed an interest in my next probable nomination for adminship. Messaging people when it happens would look a lot like canvassing, so I would prefer not doing that. If you are interested in it, you could add this to your watchlist. If it is created, you will know, maybe even before I do depending on how often you check your watchlist. If you wish to gush prior to it being officially up, have fun, but only when it happens please. I am in no particular rush. Have a very nice day! :) - LA @ 10:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC) |
Battlecruiser edit
Hmm, maybe. I'm mostly keen to have a properly-referenced and accurate article - it's a subject on which there are many misconceptions. I am trying to get a lot of battleship articles up to FA standard but hadn't really planned to with battlecruiser, but I got a bit irritated with the article as it stood. Help with proofreading, improving the prose and generally reviewing would be much appreciated! The Land (talk) 09:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I often find that articles which make all the specialists who edit them and give them A-class reviews don't satisfy casual readers. You will probably find it easier to spot anything unclear, badly-explained or taken-for-granted in my writing than someone who knows about the subject. And, of course most Wikipedia articles are written by people who know nothing about the subject ;-) The Land (talk) 15:50, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
List of battleships of France edit
 | This user page may require cleanup to meet Wikipedia's quality standards. No cleanup reason has been specified. Please help improve this user page if you can; the talk page may contain suggestions. |
You added the above tag to List of battleships of France. Was there a reason for this? There is a reference for every ship listed. The brief introduction at the top has some references, but is mainly justified by the referenced lists of ships. It is difficult to understand what cleaning up is possible.--Toddy1 (talk) 20:53, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I've removed the tag. Since it is a list, rather than a proper article, it will inevitably look different. The Land (talk) 21:01, 7 May 2008 (UTC)
- I apoligize--I aught to have used {{cleanup-section}}...I only meant that the introduction should be modified, and I didn't want to do it becasue I didn't know where that information should go. I just did not think that the intro looks right...if I had taken more time, maybe I would not have done that. the_ed17 02:06, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Introduction. The introduction is not meant to be a history of the development of French armoured battleships. However some introduction is necessary:
- to explain that there were patterns of development (i.e. it is more than a 'phonebook' for battleships),
- because most people have no idea how the 'stationnairre' (2nd class) ships fitted in and why they stopped building them
- to explain about the coastal service ships.
The Land has suggested that something should be written explaining the difference between the standard 'pre-dreadnought' layout and the rival lozenge layout for battleships. (Note that lozenge was a contemporary term, whilst 'pre-dreadnought' was not.) I agree that this would be desirable - it would be best done as wikilinks to an article on battleship development that discussed the issues of 1880s/90s battleship design.
If you have ideas about the introduction, why not sketch them out here. Other people can slot in the facts--Toddy1 (talk) 04:36, 8 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 2nd and 9th, 2008. edit
 |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 18 | 2 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 19 | 9 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 06:50, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
The Novels WikiProject Newsletter - Issue XXIV - May 2008 edit
The May 2008 issue of the Novels WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you. SteveCrossinBot (talk) 08:20, 10 May 2008 (UTC)
Thanks for the comments on The Benji Hillman Foundation edit
....but, isn't it better to wait for the AfD closure? Or did you close it because, now the article has been moved. In any case, shouldnt there be a note somewhere reg this? Just letting you know.... Prashanthns (talk) 06:44, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- No, I figured that the article did not meet the requirements for deletion any longer, with the possible exception of notability. ChaffChaff is learning quick;y, and I'm sure that he will get that article beyond start-class. the_ed17 15:05, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
- Thanks for the clarif. I am very happy that the article reads well now!Cheers. Prashanthns (talk) 15:18, 12 May 2008 (UTC)
War elephants and USS Nevada edit
I was just reading interesting articles and taking the time to make minor improvements. So if thanks are necessary, I have to thank you for writing them. Huon (talk) 15:13, 14 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 12th, 2008. edit
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 20 | 12 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 09:54, 15 May 2008 (UTC)
Signpost updated for May 19th and 26th, 2008. edit
| |
|---|
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 21 | 19 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| ||
| Volume 4, Issue 22 | 26 May 2008 | About the Signpost |
|
| ||
|
| |
| Home | Archives | Newsroom | Tip Line | Single-Page View | Shortcut : WP:POST |
|
| |
You are receiving this message because you have signed up for the Signpost spamlist. If you wish to stop receiving these messages, simply remove your name from the list. Ralbot (talk) 07:44, 31 May 2008 (UTC)