User talk:Innotata/Archive14

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.

---

April 2013

The Signpost: 01 April 2013

• Special report: Who reads which Wikipedia?

• WikiProject report: Special: FAQs

• Featured content: What the ?

• News and notes: Grants given for Wikipedia Library, six others; April Fool's Day ructions

• Arbitration report: Three open cases

• Technology report: Wikidata phase 2 deployment timetable in doubt

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 16:33, 5 April 2013 (UTC)

Welcome to MILHIST

Hello and welcome to the Military history WikiProject! As you may have guessed, we're a group of editors working to improve Wikipedia's coverage of topics related to military history.

A few features that you might find helpful:

• Our navigation box points to most of the useful pages within the project.
• The announcement and open task box is updated very frequently. You can watchlist it if you are interested, or you can add it directly to your user page by copying the following: {{WPMILHIST Announcements}}.
• Important discussions take place on the project's main discussion page; it is highly recommended that you watchlist it.
• The project has several departments, which handle article quality assessment, detailed article and content review, writing contests, and article logistics.
• We have a number of task forces that focus on specific topics, nations, periods, and conflicts.
• We've developed a set of guidelines that cover article structure and content, template use, categorization, and many other issues of interest.
• If you're looking for something to work on, there are many articles that need attention, as well as a number of review alerts.

If you have any questions, please don't hesitate to ask any of the project coordinators or any other experienced member of the project, and we'll be happy to help you. Again, welcome, and we are looking forward to seeing you around! Anotherclown (talk) 07:13, 7 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 08 April 2013

• Wikizine: WMF scales back feature after outcry

• WikiProject report: Earthshattering WikiProject Earthquakes

• News and notes: French intelligence agents threaten Wikimedia volunteer

• Arbitration report: Subject experts needed for Argentine History

• Featured content: Wikipedia loves poetry

• Technology report: Testing week

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:59, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 15 April 2013

• Op-ed: How do we fix RfA inactivity?

• WikiProject report: Unity in Diversity: South Africa

• News and notes: Another admin reform attempt flops

• Featured content: The featured process swings into high gear

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:43, 17 April 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXV, April 2013

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 reviews: Sturmvogel 66 and Hawkeye7 look at aspects of the Pacific War Op-ed: ErrantX considers the rabbit hole of research

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) 16:12, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Crossley images

The above message is not entirely relevant, since it's about adding information. The images from the Crossley Guide should be very useful, but we need evidence they are under the given licenses, as I've explained on your Wikimedia Commons page. I don't think there's a solid rule you can't add them, but it's good to avoid promotion. I'd suggest you not add these images to articles, and let them be added by others: they will be noticed, and I can look through them and see if any are useful.

I have an additional concern. The English Wikipedia only allows individuals to have an account. You can edit Wikipedia as a Princeton University Press employee, but you need to use a personal account. If this is not a personal account it will need to be blocked (or made into one and renamed). Please take a look at the link. Thanks, —innotata 20:36, 22 April 2013 (UTC)

This is my personal account and I'm getting the license information for you. Thanks! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princetonnature (talk • contribs) 16:49, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

That's great! For the username issue, do you want to make it clear it's one person's account but you are a Princeton Press employee, on your user page, so that people don't get confused? —innotata 16:53, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

You'll want to send the email about this to permissions-commons@wikimedia.org in the next few days, so the images don't get deleted. —innotata 16:59, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Will do regarding the user name. Trying to figure out how to do that exactly.

And I sent the email to the address you requested yesterday.

Thanks — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princetonnature (talk • contribs) 17:32, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Your page looks good. —innotata 17:42, 23 April 2013 (UTC)

Hi Innotata: Richard is a good friend of mine, so I've called him tonight to see if he has actually given permission for these plates to be made universally available; left a message on his machine, and will let you know the result. Gotta say, my gut instinct is no way did he do so! MeegsC (talk) 01:51, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

I wouldn't think so, but Princetonnature is a Princeton University Press employee, confirmed to me by email and to OTRS; I haven't asked if Mr Crossley has given permission personally, also maybe the publisher has the right to. —innotata 02:45, 28 April 2013 (UTC)

So I saw Richard today, and he says he did indeed give his permission for any and all plates from his books to be uploaded to Wikimedia Commons. Go figure!  :) Presumably, the PUP employee will continue to upload them. MeegsC (talk) 03:32, 7 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 22 April 2013

• In the media: Wikipedia inaccurate, says Florence; New Wikipedia app for breaking news

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Editor Retention

• News and notes: Milan conference a mixed bag

• Featured content: Batfish in the Red Sea

• Arbitration report: Sexology case nears closure after stalling over topic ban

• Technology report: A flurry of deployments

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 16:03, 25 April 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Great American Wiknic for Minnesota in June

Howdy! I would like to invite you to again join with a local edition of the Great American Wiknic this June :) Also, please add any preliminary details to Wikipedia:Wiknic#2013 Wiknic.--Pharos (talk) 17:17, 1 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 29 April 2013

• News and notes: Chapter furore over FDC knockbacks; First DC GLAM boot-camp

• In the media: Wikipedia's sexism; Yuri Gadyukin hoax

• Featured content: Wiki loves video games

• WikiProject report: Japanese WikiProject Baseball

• Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles

• Arbitration report: Sexology closed; two open cases

• Recent research: Sentiment monitoring; UNESCO and systemic bias; and more

• Technology report: New notifications system deployed across Wikipedia

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 09:41, 2 May 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for helping with Richard Crossley images

Hi,

I just wanted to take a moment to thank you for helping me a few weeks ago.

I'm happy to report that the Commons finally granted me permission for these images. I will be uploading over 800 images of Richard's into the commons. I think they will be a valuable addition to help capture the beauty of these wonderful species,

Thanks again,

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princetonnature (talk • contribs) 14:57, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

That's great that Mr Crossley has released so many, and you'll keep uploading them. I'm glad I helped ensure you weren't turned away from getting these up. I'm sure we'll find uses for some of them, as at field guide (the only image is one) and especially once rarer species' images get uploaded. —innotata 17:00, 9 May 2013 (UTC)

Ok, over 700 species accounts are up and the OTRS team has been helpful in assigning permission to each to prevent them from being deleted. Thanks again! I hope the editors can find them helpful--especially for the rarer ones as you mention,

John — Preceding unsigned comment added by Princetonnature (talk • contribs) 17:48, 14 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 06 May 2013

• News and notes: Candidates nominating for Foundation elections; Looking ahead to Wikimania 2014

• Technology report: Foundation successful in bid for larger Google subsidy

• Featured content: WikiCup update: full speed ahead!

• In the media: New Wikipedia for Schools edition; Anders Behring Breivik's Wikipedia contributions

• WikiProject report: Earn $100 in cash... and a button!

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 04:48, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 13 May 2013

• News and notes: WMF–community ruckus on Wikimedia mailing list

• WikiProject report: Knock Out: WikiProject Mixed Martial Arts

• Featured content: A mushroom, a motorway, a Munich gallery, and a map

• In the media: PR firm accused of editing Wikipedia for government clients; can Wikipedia predict the stock market?

• Arbitration report: Race and politics opened; three open cases

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:21, 16 May 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVI, May 2013

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 reviews: Dumelow on the French Foreign Legion and Nick-D on New Zealand military history Op-ed: Nick-D on military history tourism

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) 14:06, 22 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 20 May 2013

• Foundation elections: Trustee candidates speak about Board structure, China, gender, global south, endowment

• WikiProject report: Classical Greece and Rome

• News and notes: Spanish Wikipedia leaps past one million articles

• In the media: Qworty incident continues

• Featured content: Up in the air

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:47, 23 May 2013 (UTC)

Dambo Cisticola or Cisticola Dambo?

Hi Innodata, Can you look into this? Are the English and Latin in reverse order? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dambo_Cisticola Regards, Rui ''Gabriel'' Correia (talk) 20:37, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

The page is correct. The genus name is Cisticola and the species name is dambo, so the Latin name is Cisticola dambo, wheras English puts these things in the reverse order, hence the common name. —innotata 21:06, 27 May 2013 (UTC)

Deutschlandlied

Greets. Thank you for the welcome and you claimed you made it so "The song of the Germans" and "Song of the Germans" would redirect to Deutschlandlied but I tested it and it didn't work?? Anyways, thanks. JohnnyR997 (talk) 04:38, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

It worked, never mind.

So sorry! It actually does work, and thank you for doing that.JohnnyR997 (talk) 14:17, 28 May 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 27 May 2013

• News and notes: First-ever community election for FDC positions

• In the media: Pagans complain about Qworty's anti-Pagan editing

• Foundation elections: Candidates talk about the Meta problem, the nation-based chapter model, world languages, and value for money

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Geographical Coordinates

• Featured content: Life of 2π

• Recent research: Motivations on the Persian Wikipedia; is science eight times more popular on the Spanish Wikipedia than the English Wikipedia?

• Technology report: Amsterdam hackathon: continuity, change, and stroopwafels

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:54, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

May 2013

Hello, I'm BracketBot. I have automatically detected that your edit to University of Minnesota may have broken the syntax by modifying 1 "{}"s. If you have, don't worry, just edit the page again to fix it. If I misunderstood what happened, or if you have any questions, you can leave a message on my operator's talk page.

Thanks, BracketBot (talk) 16:05, 31 May 2013 (UTC)

June 2013

A cookie for you!

Sorry to disrupt you while working on cleaning up Celeste Buckingham photos. I've been working on transferring a whole bunch of them to Commons over the last couple of nights, and because I had a CC license with a link to Lukáš Dvořák's Wikipedia article open in another tab I thought I'd make the small improvement to the images you transfered while I was at it. I hope you don't mind. Thanks for all your hard work and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 03:07, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, good to know you're transferring the images. As far as clean-up goes: Not sure what you're trying to say, but you shouldn't include links to Wikipedia articles in recommended attributions—they aren't official websites or otherwise linked to the author. OTRS ticket links are not copyright statuses, so they belong in the permission field, not the license section. —innotata 03:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the heads-up on not linking to Wikipedia articles in license templates: I'll go back and remove the links to Lukáš Dvořák from the licenses on all of his photographs on Commons. Regarding the issue of where to put the OTRS tickets, I checked the template page itself on Commons ({{PermissionOTRS}}), and according to it both the permission field and the license section are equally acceptable (I had thought that the license section was preferred, so I stand corrected on that point, but there is nothing improper with putting an OTRS ticket link in the license section). Going forward, I will refrain from moving the OTRS ticket link from the permission field to the licensing section, but I myself will continue placing it in the licensing section on files that I transfer. Thanks again, and take care! Michael Barera (talk) 22:32, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

Disambiguation link notification for June 4

Hi. Thank you for your recent edits. Wikipedia appreciates your help. We noticed though that when you edited Nicollet Island, you added a link pointing to the disambiguation page Cedar Lake (check to confirm | fix with Dab solver). Such links are almost always unintended, since a disambiguation page is merely a list of "Did you mean..." article titles. Read the FAQ • Join us at the DPL WikiProject.

It's OK to remove this message. Also, to stop receiving these messages, follow these opt-out instructions. Thanks, DPL bot (talk) 13:23, 4 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 05 June 2013

• From the editor: Signpost developments

• Featured content: A week of portraits

• Discussion report: Return of the Discussion report

• News and notes: "Cease and desist", World Trade Organization says to Wikivoyage; Could WikiLang be the next WMF project?

• In the media: China blocks secure version of Wikipedia

• WikiProject report: Operation Normandy

• Technology report: Developers accused of making Toolserver fight 'pointless'

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 01:50, 7 June 2013 (UTC)

Spizella passerina

Dear Innotata,

Thank you for your wise editings. I have modified Spizella passerina explaining that it does not belong to Old World Sparrows radiation. However, if you think that it should be as you proposed, please go ahead and change it.

Regards JavierAlonso (talk) 18:24, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

It's best you not add text that's so incoherent in English. The information in Allende et al. doesn't really belong in each American sparrow's page—it only discusses the relationships of the entire family, so the details belong at articles like American sparrow and Emberizidae. You could add the simple fact that American sparrows are not the closest relatives of Passeridae, but remember that all animals are related. —innotata 18:39, 11 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you. I will add "Chipping Sparrow is not phylogenetically related to Passeridae in our studies <ref>Allende, Luis M. (2001). "The Old World sparrows (genus Passer) phylogeography and their relative abundance of nuclear mtDNA pseudogenes" (PDF). Journal of Molecular Evolution. 53 (2): 144–154. PMID 11479685. Archived from the original (PDF) on 21 July 2011. {{cite journal}}: Unknown parameter |coauthors= ignored (|author= suggested) (help)</ref>"

Regards. — Preceding unsigned comment added by JavierAlonso (talk • contribs) 10:40, 21 June 2013‎

Sorry, this is too meaningless, especially to those who don't know about systematics. What does "phylogenetically related" mean? Is it just the Chipping Sparrow that's unrelated to Passeridae? Also, don't say "our studies"—you and your colleagues aren't the sole authors of the article and Wikipedia is an encyclopaedia. I've changed it to "The Chipping Sparrow is part of the family Emberizidae, and is not closely related to the Old World sparrows of the family Passeridae." —innotata 17:04, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your editing. Regards. JavierAlonso (talk) 16:52, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 12 June 2013

• News and notes: How Wikimedia affiliates are spending $8.4 million; PRISM scandal

• Featured content: Mixing Bowl Interchange

• In the media: VisualEditor will "change world history"

• Op-ed: The tragedy of Wikipedia's commons

• Discussion report: VisualEditor, elections, bots, and more

• Traffic report: Who holds the throne?

• Arbitration report: Two cases suspended; proposed decision posted in Argentine History

• WikiProject report: Processing WikiProject Computing

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)

Re: File:Tamias striatus albino.jpg

Hello, I think that this interesting file is a very good example of a leucic tamias striatus rather than albinos. The eyes remain pigmented as in leucism, while it would be red if it was albinism. Thank you for your implication. Laurent Bélanger (talk) 04:40, 19 June 2013 (UTC)

You're probably right, I don't know better than you. —innotata 04:17, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 19 June 2013

• Op-ed: Two responses to the 'Tragedy of Wikipedia's Commons'

• Traffic report: Most popular Wikipedia articles of the last week

• In the media: South African learners want Wikipedia; Editing of Israel topics

• WikiProject report: The Volunteer State: WikiProject Tennessee

• News and notes: Swedish Wikipedia's millionth article leads to protests; WMF elections—where are all the voters?

• Featured content: Cheaper by the dozen

• Discussion report: Citations, non-free content, and a MediaWiki meeting

• Technology report: May engineering report published

• Arbitration report: The Farmbrough amendment request—automation and arbitration enforcement

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 00:09, 21 June 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVII, June 2013

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 reviews: Works on the RNZAF, World War I in the Baltic, and British battleship construction Op-ed: Anchors Aweigh for the Majestic Titans

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) 09:44, 24 June 2013 (UTC)

Canada Goose

Could you elaborate on "optimally compact"? I believe the one I added to be a better representation as the lighting seems better - the head and neck of the previous photo are very poorly lit and are not that distinguishable at it's current size. Thanks. – Connormah (talk) 03:06, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I also have this one as well, by the way (just uploaded it) – Connormah (talk) 03:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

They're very tall, so the image is elongated; a compact, less vertical image is better for the top (and to fit with the standard taxobox width). The current image isn't significantly different in quality, there's not much detail gained.

Apart from the one you just uploaded, they're at bad angles for viewing the plumage. Additionally, they're facing right, and don't show the legs. You know, we have a lot of Canada Goose photos, so not all of them can be in the species article. —innotata 03:22, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Plus, your photos probably are Giant Canadas, while the current one is a more typical bird. —innotata 03:24, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

How large are the giant Canadas typically? I actually have no idea as I'm particularly new to birding. I just found the neck and head particularly dark on the current one - the eyes aren't noticeable and I feel a better lit photo would be better. I can also flip the one I just mentioned if needed. – Connormah (talk) 03:38, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

They weigh almost twice as much as Easterns, and have a very different shape especially on the neck. I need to find detailed information on measurements.

My one issue is the excess verticality of the image, and in my opinion nothing makes up for that. There's practically no detail lost on the current one—not all geese have the white feathers around the eye and bill the one you photographed had. Apart from the head, the current one is good, look at the back for example. —innotata 03:52, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

There a number of good images, a quick look turns up File:Fredenbaum-100719-15667-Kanadagans.jpg, which has a better lit head and is horizontal. —innotata 03:56, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

Could the second one be satisfactory (perhaps with a flip)? I just feel again the a more dynamically lit lead image is more beneficial for this particular species - from afar the current image doesn't really give indication of the positioning of the eyes and such IMO. And as for the eye - I'm not entirely sure what the white outlining is, but I don't think they are feathers, rather some kind of buildup of some sort. Strange. As for the other one you mentioned, that could work as well! (or I could go out again tomorrow and try to get some better shots...) – Connormah (talk) 04:02, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

I also have File:Branta canadensis - June 2013 (4).JPG – Connormah (talk) 04:11, 25 June 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 26 June 2013

• Traffic report: Most-viewed articles of the week

• In the media: Daily Dot on Commons and porn; Jimmy Wales accused of breaking Wikipedia rules in hunt for Snowden

• Recent research: Most controversial Wikipedia topics, automatic detection of sockpuppets

• News and notes: Election results released

• Discussion report: Privacy policy, X!'s edit counter, old rangeblocks, and the Article Incubator

• Featured content: Wikipedia in black + Adam Cuerden

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Fashion

• Arbitration report: Argentine History closed; two cases remain suspended

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:09, 27 June 2013 (UTC)

July 2013

The Signpost: 03 July 2013

• In the media: Jimmy Wales is not an Internet billionaire; a mass shooter's alleged Wikipedia editing

• Featured content: Queen of France

• WikiProject report: Puppies!

• News and notes: Wikipedia's medical collaborations gathering pace

• Discussion report: Snuggle, mainpage link to Wikinews, 3RR, and more

• Technology report: VisualEditor in midst of game-changing deployment series

• Traffic report: Yahoo! crushes the competition ... in Wikipedia views

• Arbitration report: Tea Party movement reopened, new AUSC appointments

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 01:09, 5 July 2013 (UTC)

Mandarin Ducks are found in Nepal

Hey, see List of birds of Nepal in Ducks, geese and swans section it's listed there too and it's found in Nepal too. I am from Nepal. -Krish Dulal (talk) 09:42, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

No, they are not found anywhere near Nepal (unless they are kept in captivity as ornamental birds), see the IUCN Red List. You don't have any sources for this claim. —innotata 17:32, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

It turns out the list was not quite correct, they are only present as vagrants, so they do not belong in the "Birds of Nepal" category. —innotata 18:05, 7 July 2013 (UTC)

Ok, I was unknown to the fact. -Krish Dulal (talk) 14:12, 14 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 10 July 2013

• Op-ed: It's time to stop pretending the English-language Wikinews is a viable project

• WikiProject report: Not Jimbo: WikiProject Wales

• Traffic report: Inflated view counts here, there, and everywhere

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation Board appoints world expert in women's issues, global south

• Dispatches: Infoboxes: time for a fresh look?

• Featured content: The week of the birds

• Discussion report: Featured article process governance, signature templates, and more

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 10:34, 12 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 17 July 2013

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Square Enix

• Traffic report: Most-viewed articles of the week

• News and notes: Wikimedia Foundation's new plans announced

• Featured content: Documents and sports

• Arbitration report: Kiefer.Wolfowitz and Ironholds case opens; July 22 deadline for checkuser and oversight applications

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 19:14, 18 July 2013 (UTC)

Geonotice

Should be up now. Andrew Gray (talk) 22:22, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks! —innotata 23:45, 24 July 2013 (UTC)

You decide :-)

re [1], I think you are probably right, that photo of the sparrow is probably an immature bird, I was going to re-cat the pic but thought I would check the image's history first ... [2] it appears you are the one who decided it was a female specimen ! :-). Shall I leave you to recat the image? --Tony Wills (talk) 09:50, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

That was 2010, I probably hadn't read about the trouble with immatures and wasn't being very careful. I've removed it from the female category now. —innotata 13:45, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

Thanks, for that and the additions to the article, I wasn't aware how difficult it was to discriminate between the immature birds (I obviously don't take enough notice of sparrows!) --Tony Wills (talk) 21:07, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Bugle: Issue LXXXVIII, July 2013

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 reviews: Nick-D looks at Australia's frontier wars Interview: What Wikimedia chapters can offer military history editors

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) 16:21, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 24 July 2013

• In the media: Wikipedia flamewars

• WikiProject report: WikiProject Religion

• Discussion report: Partially disambiguated page names, page protection policy, and more

• News and notes: Wikivoyage turns ten, but where to now?; Wikipedia Zero expands into India

• Traffic report: Gleeless

• Featured content: Engineering and the arts

• Arbitration report: Infoboxes case opens

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 23:01, 25 July 2013 (UTC)

The Signpost: 31 July 2013

• Op-ed: The VisualEditor Beta and the path to change

• Recent research: Napoleon, Michael Jackson and Srebrenica across cultures, 90% of Wikipedia better than Britannica, WikiSym preview

• Traffic report: Bouncing Baby Brouhaha

• WikiProject report: Babel Series: Politics on the Turkish Wikipedia

• News and notes: Gearing up for Wikimania 2013

• Arbitration report: Race and politics case closes

• Featured content: Caterpillars, warblers, and frogs—oh my!

• Discussion report: Defining consensus; VisualEditor default state; expert and layperson terms in article titles

• Read this Signpost in full
• Single-page
• Unsubscribe
• EdwardsBot (talk) 05:14, 2 August 2013 (UTC)

This is an archive of past discussions. 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.