User talk:Carcharoth/Archive 62

This is an archive of past discussions with User:Carcharoth. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at a failed German counterattack in the Battle of Normandy

G'day all, March Madness 2020 is about to get underway, and there is bling aplenty for those who want to get stuck into the backlog by way of tagging, assessing, updating, adding or improving resources and creating articles. If you haven't already signed up to participate, why not? The more the merrier! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 08:19, 29 February 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

And so ends the first round of the competition. Everyone with a positive score moves on to Round 2, with 57 contestants qualifying. We have abolished the groups this year, so to qualify for Round 3 you will need to finish Round 2 among the top thirty-two contestants.

Our top scorers in Round 1 were:

• Epicgenius, a WikiCup newcomer, led the field with a featured article, five good articles and an assortment of other submissions, specialising on buildings and locations in New York, for a total of 895 points.
• Gog the Mild came next with 464 points, from a featured article, two good articles and a number of reviews, the main theme being naval warfare.
• Raymie was in third place with 419 points, garnered from one good article and an impressive 34 DYKs on radio and TV stations in the United States.
• Harrias came next at 414, with a featured article and three good articles, an English civil war battle specialist.
• CaptainEek was in fifth place with 405 points, mostly garnered from bringing Cactus wren to featured article status.
• The top ten contestants at the end of Round 1 all scored over 200 points; they also included L293D, Kingsif, Enwebb, Lee Vilenski and CAPTAIN MEDUSA. Seven of the top ten contestants in Round 1 are new to the WikiCup.

These contestants, like all the others, now have to start scoring points again from scratch. In Round 1 there were four featured articles, one featured list and two featured pictures, as well as around two hundred DYKs and twenty-seven ITNs. Between them, contestants completed 127 good article reviews, nearly a hundred more than the 43 good articles they claimed for, thus making a substantial dent in the review backlog. Contestants also claimed for 40 featured article / featured list reviews, and most even remembered to mention their WikiCup participation in their reviews (a requirement).

Remember that any content promoted after the end of Round 1 but before the start of Round 2 can be claimed in Round 2. Some contestants made claims before the new submissions pages were set up, and they will need to resubmit them. 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. 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 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. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth (talk). MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 16:46, 1 March 2020 (UTC)

There was an error in the WikiCup 2020 March newsletter; L293D should not have been included in the list of top ten scorers in Round 1 (they led the list last year), instead, Dunkleosteus77 should have been included, having garnered 334 points from five good articles on animals, living or extinct, and various reviews. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 09:29, 2 March 2020 (UTC)

A tag has been placed on Category:WikiProject Middle-earth article content templates requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section C1 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the category has been empty for seven days or more and is not a disambiguation category, a category redirect, a featured topics category, under discussion at Categories for discussion, or a project category that by its nature may become empty on occasion.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be deleted without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. UnitedStatesian (talk) 02:20, 10 March 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews

Hey Carch. I'm just moving the thread over here from Iri's talk page, because it feels like bad manners to have a two-way conversation on somebody else's talk page. I did remove that link as dead, but I'd seen that you'd put it on the talk page so it wasn't gone forever. Some of the stuff I take out might go back in at a later date, but I'm not forgetting about it. The way I write an article is to build a skeleton first and then start hanging the meat on the bones. There's also a (small but growing) pile of stuff at User:HJ Mitchell/Sandbox that doesn't yet have a home in the article but needs working in later on it's also a dumping ground for semi-coherent thoughts and things I might come back to one day!, so definitely keep putting anything you dredge up on the talk page or wherever. It might take months, but I'll get to it. The representations in art is something I hadn't really thought of (ironic, considering I have a model of it on my bookcase!); it's definitely something that needs thought. The social history I had thought of; some of it's covered in the more academic books (eg Jay Winter's Sites of Memory and Ana Carden-Coyne's Reconstructing the Body, as well as some of the biographies of Lutyens. The other cenotaphs I haven't quite decided what to do with yet. They're not at risk of disappearing, don't worry. One of my thoughts is they might end up as a daughter article or list with just the most important examples in the main article. You can't put it in context without mentioning its influence on memorials across Britain and the empire, as it was then, (although it only seems to have been popular in Australia, NZ, Canada and HK). A lot depends on how long the article gets; I don't want to overwhelm the reader with information, and if it's getting too dense there might have to be a couple of daughter articles.

I'm working my way though Greenberg at the minute, though I'll be honest I find some of the material on geometry and reference to classical architecture quite dense; I'm used to writing history, and it's a little bit out of my comfort zone, but it's good to keep the brain active. I've also got a copy of the TLS piece now; there's a lot of background in there about the victory parade and the national mood and the state of politics at the time (some of which is relevant wrt the Cenotaph capturing that mood), but relatively little about the Cenotaph itself that isn't published elsewhere. Apologies for length! Best, HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:55, 16 March 2020 (UTC)

No worries about the length, Harry. Yes, I should have decamped from Iri's talk page to here (or Talk:The Cenotaph) earlier, sorry about that. Let's keep talking about what sources are good to use. I may edit the page in question more than I would usually (i.e. being more active rather than just offering advice). Hopefully that won't cramp your writing style too much. PS. My editing might be a bit sporadic over the next few days, as circumstances and my access to a suitable environment in which to edit can change rapidly given the current circumstances. Hope all is well with you and yours. Carcharoth (talk) 12:29, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Not cramping at all. I welcome all help in building the best article we can. It's likely that when it's finished it will be the best freely available account of one of England's most famous and most important monuments. And of course thee will be areas that interest you more than me and vice versa. As for sources, you can see the sorts of material I've been using so far on some of my other articles (I think Southampton Cenotaph and the Arch of Remembrance have the longest bibliographies so far). I tend to start with the sources that have the most to say and then add in more information and other perspectives from other others as I go through. Btw, there are quite a few drawings and other interesting illustrations in Greenberg that could be useful, but I'm not sure of their copyright status (presumably if Lutyens held the copyright, it should have expired 2015 and if it was crown copyright it should have expired, but if it rested elsewhere I have no idea) and I have no idea how to extract them from the PDF I've got. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 22:12, 19 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. An automated process has detected that when you recently edited The Cenotaph, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Crystal Palace (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are usually incorrect, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of unrelated topics with similar 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) 16:55, 17 March 2020 (UTC)

Template:History of Middle-earth navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 20:49, 18 March 2020 (UTC)

Hi, if you're popping in now and again, maybe you'd take a look at this - I'm reworking it with new structure and at least one major theme that was missing, language (how did people miss that?). I hope it's not becoming too arcane? Trying to be comprehensible with examples, quotations, and indeed illustrations... would love to know what you think. Heaven knows how we'll find a GAN reviewer for it, things seem to take longer and longer and get more and more hit-and-miss. Keep well. Chiswick Chap (talk) 17:28, 27 March 2020 (UTC)

@Chiswick Chap: - only managing to pop in now and again, as you say. Have had a quick look. I will put a couple of comments here and say more later on the talk page if time. It looks very good overall. One theme, though maybe it fits better in J. R. R. Tolkien's influences (in the personal experience section) is the writings by various people about the influence of Tolkien's service in The Great War on his writings. That is definitely missing in both articles at the moment.

Many thanks. The war experience (and living through WW2 as a civilian) is definitely an Influence not a Theme. We have both JRRT's own word for its importance and that of many critics, I don't think they add a huge amount though Shippey is entertaining on Balrogs and flammenwerfers.

The Influences article is a sorry list, though I regrouped it; there's something very wrong about it, probably that it's trying too hard to itemise each language etc rather than considering the nature of the influence, but whatever the reason it's very plodding and uninformative. Ideas? Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

On the missing religion, there is the bit Gandalf says at the coronation of Aragorn about "while the thrones of the Valar endure", and the finding of the sapling of the White Tree has some religious overtones that some have commented on, IIRC.

Many critics are very clear about the role of Providence, i.e. the Valar executing the will of Eru; Shippey connects this with Fate and Luck (and the Free Will of all the characters), I think very persuasively.

I think you have to be a bit careful about language such as "supposed negative themes", as there has been quite a bit of negative criticism and I am not sure where the right balance lies there.

Well, as people have offered criticisms, and as each one has been carefully rebutted by others, the title seems to fit the facts rather closely.

Have you had any thoughts on length and whether anything needs splitting off? It would be possible to write lots more, but I think you are getting the balance right there. People will want a one-stop article covering all the themes. Also, some of the themes are seen more in his other works (e.g. Fate and Free Will in the bit in Unfinished Tales [and other versions] where Ulmo appars to Tuor and says his bit about 'armour against fate', which is the title of a book I have on my shelves about British military intelligence in the First World War, though I think that is a complete coincidence), so is there potential for covering that somewhere? Carcharoth (talk) 19:56, 29 March 2020 (UTC)

Yes, it mustn't get too much longer. On the non-LOTR materials, that's a broader topic, and not one I'd feel like attempting. Chiswick Chap (talk) 08:22, 30 March 2020 (UTC)

I've finally got round to having a go at this hoary old article. It's looking less of a sad cruft-list and more of a decent attempt at an article already. See what you think when you have a moment. It's beginning to look like a match for Themes (and for the existing coverage of his Invented languages ... obviously the fans liked that one...). Chiswick Chap (talk) 18:36, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks at the logistics behind the Crusades and the USAF's early Cold War nuclear deterrant

Template:LotR casts navbox has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Gonnym (talk) 08:26, 20 April 2020 (UTC)

The second round of the 2020 WikiCup has now finished. It was a high-scoring round and contestants needed 75 points to advance to round 3. There were some very impressive efforts in round 2, with the top ten contestants all scoring more than 500 points. A large number of the points came from the 12 featured articles and the 186 good articles achieved in total by contestants, and the 355 good article reviews they performed; the GAN backlog drive and the stay-at-home imperative during the COVID-19 pandemic may have been partially responsible for these impressive figures.

Our top scorers in round 2 were:

• Epicgenius, with 2333 points from one featured article, forty-five good articles, fourteen DYKs and plenty of bonus points
• Gog the Mild, with 1784 points from three featured articles, eight good articles, a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews and lots of bonus points
• The Rambling Man, with 1262 points from two featured articles, eight good articles and a hundred good article reviews
• Harrias, with 1141 points from two featured articles, three featured lists, ten good articles, nine DYKs and a substantial number of featured article and good article reviews
• Lee Vilenski with 869 points, Hog Farm with 801, Kingsif with 719, SounderBruce with 710, Dunkleosteus77 with 608 and MX with 515.

The rules for featured article reviews have been adjusted; reviews may cover three aspects of the article, content, images and sources, and contestants may receive points for each of these three types of review. Please also remember the requirement to mention the WikiCup when undertaking an FAR for which you intend to claim points. Remember also that DYKs cannot be claimed until they have appeared on the main page. As we enter the third round, any content promoted after the end of round 2 but before the start of round 3 can be claimed now, and anything you forgot to claim in round 2 cannot! Remember too, that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anything else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk) and Cwmhiraeth. - MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 17:44, 1 May 2020 (UTC)

Hi Carcharoth I write two article with wikipedia roles. Please I wrote two articles according to Wikipedia rules. 1. Draft:Arash Ghaderi 2. Draft:Hasan Rahnamaeian Please check them and accept if there is no problem. Warm regards. Omid ahmadyani (talk) 10:11, 7 May 2020 (UTC)

Category:Númenóreans has been nominated for merging. A discussion is taking place to decide whether this proposal complies with the categorization guidelines. If you would like to participate in the discussion, you are invited to add your comments at the category's entry on the categories for discussion page. Thank you. Hog Farm (talk) 18:37, 13 May 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D and Hawkeye7 look at fortifications, the German Army, and post-Cold War conflict

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Caragdûr. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 25#Caragdûr until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm (talk) 15:18, 25 May 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Elendur son of Isildur. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 26#Elendur son of Isildur until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm (talk) 21:37, 26 May 2020 (UTC)

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Círyon. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2020 May 28#Círyon until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. Hog Farm (talk) 02:14, 28 May 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the naval siege of Japan in 1945

The third round of the 2020 WikiCup has now come to an end. The 16 users who made it into the fourth round each had at least 353 points (compared to 68 in 2019). It was a highly competitive round, and a number of contestants were eliminated who would have moved on in earlier years. Our top scorers in round 3 were:

• Epicgenius, with one featured article, 28 good articles and 17 DYKs, amassing 1836 points
• The Rambling Man , with 1672 points gained from four featured articles and seventeen good articles, plus reviews of a large number of FACs and GAs
• Gog the Mild, a first time contestant, with 1540 points, a tally built largely on 4 featured articles and related bonus points.

Between them, contestants managed 14 featured articles, 9 featured lists, 3 featured pictures, 152 good articles, 136 DYK entries, 55 ITN entries, 65 featured article candidate reviews and 221 good article reviews. Additionally, MPJ-DK added 3 items to featured topics and 44 to good topics. Over the course of the competition, contestants have completed 710 good article reviews, in comparison to 387 good articles submitted for review and promoted. These large numbers are probably linked to a GAN backlog drive in April and May, and the changed patterns of editing during the COVID-19 pandemic. As we enter the fourth round, remember that any content promoted after the end of round 3 but before the start of round 4 can be claimed in round 4. Please also remember that you must claim your points within 14 days of "earning" them. When doing GARs, please make sure that you check that all the GA criteria are fully met. Please also remember that all submissions must meet core Wikipedia policies, regardless of the review process.

If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article nominations, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed (remember to remove your listing when no longer required). 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 your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 12:33, 2 July 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Hadrian's Wall and Hawkeye7 on the British military Op-ed: Nick-D on diversity and military history

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews Op-ed: Nick-D on 1945

Nominations for the upcoming project coordinator election are now open. A team of up to ten coordinators will be elected for the next year. The project coordinators are the designated points of contact for issues concerning the project, and are responsible for maintaining our internal structure and processes. They do not, however, have any authority over article content or editor conduct, or any other special powers. More information on being a coordinator is available here. If you are interested in running, please sign up here by 23:59 UTC on 14 September! Voting doesn't commence until 15 September. If you have any questions, you can contact any member of the coord team. Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 02:04, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

The fourth round of the competition has finished, with 865 points being required to qualify for the final round, nearly twice as many points as last year. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with 598 and 605 points being eliminated, and all but two of the contestants who reached the final round having achieved an FA during the round. The highest scorers were

• Bloom6132, with 1478 points gained mainly from 5 featured lists, 12 DYKs and 63 in the news items;
• HaEr48 with 1318 points gained mainly from 2 featured articles, 5 good articles and 8 DYKs;
• Lee Vilenski with 1201 points mainly gained from 2 featured articles and 10 good articles.

Between them, contestants achieved 14 featured articles, 14 featured lists, 2 featured pictures, 87 good articles, 90 DYK entries, 75 ITN entries, 95 featured article candidate reviews and 81 good article reviews. Congratulations to all who participated! It was a generally high-scoring and productive round and I think we can expect a highly competitive finish to the competition.

Remember that any content promoted after the end of round 4 but before the start of round 5 can be claimed in round 5. Remember too that you must claim your points within 10 days of "earning" them. If you are concerned that your nomination will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews. It would be helpful if this list could be cleared of any items no longer relevant. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, please do your bit to keep down the review backlogs! Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages or by email. If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13 (talk), Sturmvogel 66 (talk), Vanamonde (talk), Cwmhiraeth (talk) MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 19:51, 1 September 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Recent external reviews Review Essay: Nick-D on the Historical Aircraft Restoration Society

G'day everyone, voting for the 2020 Wikiproject Military history coordinator tranche is now open. This is a simple approval vote; only "support" votes should be made. Project members should vote for any candidates they support by 23:59 (UTC) on 28 September 2020. Thanks from the outgoing coord team, Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 05:17, 15 September 2020 (UTC)

Have you (or HJ Mitchell) ever come across the naval plot in Woodlands Cemetery, Gillingham before? (Ignore the fact that the Commons category is so bloated, when I get round to it I'll sort it by ship/regiment and give the photos more informative filenames.) It's the oddest CWGC plot I've ever seen, and I can't find it documented anywhere (although admittedly I haven't looked very hard). It has plenty of the traditional CWGC gravestones one would expect, but mixed in with them there are graves of the standard CWGC design but in black granite instead of white Portland stone, graves of a non-standard design but including the usual cross, and graves of the same non-standard design with a stylised "IHS" in place of the cross.

I can find no information at all as to why there are four designs in use there, and neither the CWGC website nor the information board in the cemetery shed any light. I can't see any apparent pattern; the four designs seem to be used interchangeably for all ranks and services, to the extent that there are sailors of the same rank who died on the same day on the same ship, with each of the four designs. I initially thought that maybe the non-standard shapes and colours were perhaps from a batch of blank stones ordered before the IWGC standardised the design, but there are burials with non-standard headstones well into the 1940s.

If you're interested in such things, the cemetery is well worth a visit. It's huge by British Isles standards at 1234 service burials, plus monuments to people buried in assorted Kent churchyards that have subsequently been destroyed and a dedicated plot for victims of the Gillingham bus disaster, and it's impeccably maintained. ‑ Iridescent 18:41, 1 October 2020 (UTC)

@Iridescent: I hadn't seen that one before, no, thanks for that. I will look into it when I have time. Sadly (though for good reasons) have been very busy lately (though I don't seem to be the only one). Will try and catch up with Wikipedia matters soon. Carcharoth (talk) 01:56, 27 October 2020 (UTC) PS. The Great War Forum has some threads on CWGC headstones of different stones if that helps. IHS may have been used as it might have been difficult to engrave the cross for some reason?

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D on Franklin Roosevelt in World War II and Hog Farm on the Battle of Chancellorsville

The 2020 WikiCup has come to an end, with the final round going down to the wire. Our new Champion is Lee Vilenski (submissions), the runner-up last year, who was closely followed by Gog the Mild (submissions). In the final round, Lee achieved 4 FAs and 30 GAs, mostly on cue sport topics, while Gog achieved 3 FAs and 15 GAs, mostly on important battles and wars, which earned him a high number of bonus points. The Rambling Man (submissions) was in third place with 4 FAs and 8 GAs on football topics, with Epicgenius (submissions) close behind with 19 GAs and 16 DYK's, his interest being the buildings of New York.

The other finalists were Hog Farm (submissions), HaEr48 (submissions), Harrias (submissions) and Bloom6132 (submissions). The final round was very productive, and besides 15 FAs, contestants achieved 75 FAC reviews, 88 GAs and 108 GAN reviews. Altogether, Wikipedia has benefited greatly from the activities of WikiCup competitors all through the contest. Well done everyone!

All those who reached the final will receive awards and the following special awards will be made, based on high performance in particular areas of content creation. So that the finalists do not have an undue advantage, these prizes are awarded to the competitor who scored the highest in any particular field in a single round, or in the event of a tie, to the overall leader in this field.

• Gog the Mild (submissions) wins the featured article prize, for a total of 14 FAs during the course of the competition.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) win the featured list prize, for 5 FLs in round 4.
• Rhododendrites (submissions) wins the featured picture prize, for 3 FPs in round 3 and 5 overall.
• Lee Vilenski (submissions) wins the featured article reviewer prize, for 23 FAC reviews in round 5.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the good article prize, for 45 GAs in round 2 and 113 overall.
• MPJ-DK (submissions) wins the topic prize, for 33 articles in good topics in round 2.
• The Rambling Man (submissions) wins the good article reviewer prize, for 100 good article reviews in round 2.
• Epicgenius (submissions) wins the DYK prize, for 22 Did you know articles in round 4 and 94 overall.
• Bloom6132 (submissions) wins the ITN prize, for 63 In the news articles in round 4 and 136 overall.

Next year's competition will begin on 1 January. You are invited to sign up to participate; the WikiCup is open to all Wikipedians, both novices and experienced editors, and we hope to see you all in the 2021 competition. Until then, it only remains to once again congratulate our worthy winners, and thank all participants for their involvement! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove yourself from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. Godot13, Sturmvogel 66, Vanamonde and Cwmhiraeth MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:37, 3 November 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D & Hawkeye7 look at two aspects of 20th Century warfare Op-ed: TomStar81 on the Unknown Soldiers

Hello! Voting in the 2020 Arbitration Committee elections is now open until 23:59 (UTC) on Monday, 7 December 2020. All eligible users are allowed to vote. Users with alternate accounts may only vote once. The Arbitration Committee is the panel of editors responsible for conducting the Wikipedia arbitration process. It has the authority to impose binding solutions to disputes between editors, primarily for serious conduct disputes the community has been unable to resolve. This includes the authority to impose site bans, topic bans, editing restrictions, and other measures needed to maintain our editing environment. The arbitration policy describes the Committee's roles and responsibilities in greater detail. If you wish to participate in the 2020 election, please review the candidates and submit your choices on the voting page. If you no longer wish to receive these messages, you may add {{NoACEMM}} to your user talk page. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 01:20, 24 November 2020 (UTC)

G'day all, the nominations for the 2020 Military history WikiProject newcomer and Historian of the Year are open, all editors are encouraged to nominate candidates for the awards before until 23:59 (GMT) on 15 December 2020, after which voting will occur for 14 days. There is not much time left to nominate worthy recipients, so get to it! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 06:45, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Nick-D looks at the war in Ukraine

G'day all, voting for the WikiProject Military history "Military Historian of the Year" and "Military history newcomer of the year" is about to close, so if you haven't already, click on the links and have your say before 23:59 (GMT) on 30 December! Peacemaker67 (click to talk to me) 23:34, 28 December 2020 (UTC) for the coord team

Happy New Year and Happy New WikiCup! The competition begins today and all article creators, expanders, improvers and reviewers are welcome to take part. If you have already signed up, your submissions page can be found here. If you have not yet signed up, you can add your name here and the judges will set up your submissions page. Any questions on the rules or on anything else should be directed to one of the judges, or posted to the WikiCup talk page. 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 move on to round 2. We thank Vanamonde93 and Godot13, who have retired as judges, and we thank them for their past dedication. The judges for the WikiCup this year are Sturmvogel 66 (talk · contribs · email) and Cwmhiraeth (talk · contribs · email). Good luck! MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 11:10, 1 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy new year! Hope you're safe and settled down for yet another lockdown! I'm working on the London and North Western Railway War Memorial and might do some of the other railway war memorials since I've been slowly acquiring material about the railways in WWI. I was wondering if you (or perhaps Iridescent or one of your talk page stalkers) might be able to dig up the memorial's coverage in The Builder or the Architects Journal? Both are cited by Historic England and I was hoping they might have some more useful details. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 14:16, 5 January 2021 (UTC)

Hi Harry. Good to hear from you. All is well, though not much time to edit as I said to Iridescent above - did you see that ping from him? Will try and look at the LNWR memorial page and its sources at some point (and see if I can get access to the ones you mention). Carcharoth (talk) 05:11, 7 January 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for your efforts on the railway war memorials. Any thoughts on tracking down those magazine articles? Neither of them appear to have online archives going back that far. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 15:22, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Yeah, sorry, I went a bit away from your initial question. I did look, but failed to find anything (apart from coming across that Masonic Lodge magazine called 'The Builder'...). Looks like someone will have to go to a library, unless the Haitha Trust digital archive versions can be accessed from the USA or a suitable organisation has access to that digitisation? Even they don't have a complete run, so again a library with them is needed. There are a number of architectural journals online for those dates, but it seems a bit random which of them (if any) the memorials are featured in. Carcharoth (talk) 15:26, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

Do you think it's something a public library might have (I'm guessing not a smallish-town library so I might still need to enlist your help post-lockdown; perhaps the BL has copies?)? HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 19:44, 13 January 2021 (UTC)

You want Britain's Railways In Wartime by Anthony Lambert as a starting point for this. (As long as you're not too fussed about the condition you can pick up a copy on Amazon for a tenner or so.) It's primarily about the technicalities of railway operations in wartime, but it also covers the memorials in some detail, including a full gazetteer of them. The Railway Heritage Trust is responsible for the cataloguing—and sometimes the maintenance—of all the station miscellany like war memorials, station clocks etc (their website has a dedicated page on memorials with a lot of links) and are usually fairly helpful in pointing you to obscure potential sources. (Thanks to Ottley everything published about UK railways up to 1995 is catalogued, but it isn't online, and I assume neither of you have any particular desire to spend around £100 on the 1884-page Bibliography of British Railway History.) ‑ Iridescent 08:35, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

Iridescent, thanks, I have a copy of Lambert. It's a very useful little book, especially the section on memorials and remembrance and the gazetteer of memorials in the back. Even with that, though, the LNWR memorial's article is looking a little thin. It gets lots of mentions in lots of places but not in any great detail, which is why I was hoping to track down the articles above. The Internet Archive has some early volumes of The Builder, but annoyingly stops around the turn of the century, presumably for copyright reasons. HJ Mitchell | Penny for your thoughts? 18:59, 14 January 2021 (UTC)

The Builder (now Building) is still in print, as is the Architect's Journal. You could always write to them and ask; a lot of specialist outfits like this are delighted to have outsiders show an interest. ‑ Iridescent 03:31, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Happy First Edit Day!

Have a very happy first edit anniversary!

From the Birthday Committee, CAPTAIN RAJU^(T) 00:44, 8 January 2021 (UTC)

In response to your message, I left links to "The Times" in the talk section pf the following wikipedia pages: 1. Alfred Lord Milner 2. Viscountess Milner 3. Milner's Kindergarten I did this as an aid for other members. If there is a quality problem, or some other problem relating to newspaper sources, please let me know. Thank you.

Lord Milner is distantly related to me. He was the reason we on World War I. Link

Here is something you might like: Link to research tools Lord Milner (talk)

Replied at your talk page. Carcharoth (talk) 03:16, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

For now, this to remind me how the conversation went. You really think Lord Milner determined the outcome of World War I? It is late and I need to sleep (too many disrupted sleep patterns around these days). Will try and come back to this later. Carcharoth (talk) 04:17, 15 January 2021 (UTC)

Your Military History Newsletter Project news: From the editors; awards and honours; contest results Articles: Last month's new featured and A-class content Book review: Hawkeye7 looks Australian artillery in World War I Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on no-win scenarios