This user is very lazy. Please feel free to do his work for him.

This user opposes the Wikimedia Foundation's arbitrary, opaque, and dictatorial office-banning of administrators when the community and ArbCom are more than capable of handling the issue themselves.

Archives

Archive 1 Archive 2 Archive 3 Archive 4 Archive 5 Archive 6 Archive 7 Archive 8 Archive 9 Archive 10 Archive 11 Archive 12 Archive 13 Archive 14 Archive 15 Archive 16 Archive 17 Archive 18 Archive 19 Archive 20 Archive 21.

You may want to increment {{Archive basics}} to |counter= 22 as User talk:Serial Number 54129/Archive 21 is larger than the recommended 150Kb.

• For progressing? Battle of Pontvallain * Becky Sharp * Cèllere Codex * Dispute between Darnhall and Vale Royal Abbey * Duke and Duchess of Windsors' tour of Germany, 1937 * English invasion of Scotland (1385) * English invasion of Scotland (1400) * Greenock stowaways * John Hastings, 2nd Earl of Pembroke * John Beaumont, 1st Viscount Beaumont? * John Clifford, 9th Baron Clifford * John Minsterworth * John de Mowbray, 2nd Duke of Norfolk * John Neville, 1st Marquess of Montagu * John de la Pole, 2nd Duke of Suffolk * Loveday, 1458 * Marc Bloch * Murder of William de Cantilupe * Nicholas Exton * Percy Glading * Peter, Abbot of Vale Royal * Robert de Umfraville * Siege of Oxford (1142) * Slovak Three * Vale Royal Abbey * William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville * Wonderful Parliament

Hello:

The copy edit you requested from the Guild of Copy Editors of the article Greenock stowaways has been completed.

Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns. A couple of things I noticed. In the Ill-treatment section it reads:

Kerr, hearing of this, declared that the boys would henceforth get "the ground of their stomachs before they get any more", (Sfn|Donald|1928|p=54) but the footnote says: Refn|”Specifically, Kerr swore, according to Roughead, that the first mate would "give the ground of their stomachs before they got any more".sfn|Roughead|2014|p=15}}|group=note

Of the two mentions – the one in the text cites Donald, one as a footnote cites Roughead. One says "get" one says "give". I'm not even sure what this quote means. The citations should be checked and corrected if necessary.

Also:

It's unclear how many boys had shoes. "the stowaways had no shoes between them" or "since some of the boys had no shoes" – is that "no" or "some" – needs clarifying

In the Arrivals section the quote box mentions some had, some didn’t have shoes.

Arrivals:

Mentions five stowaways were put off the ship, where are the other two?

Same section, then we have "Of the six boys, Reilly and Bryson were keen to leave…" Seven boarded in Greenock. This just needs clarification.

Best of luck with the GA review.

Regards,

Twofingered Typist (talk) 14:17, 11 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It was 2 minutes sooner than yours :-) It is nice to know that great minds were on the same track. HeeHee. MarnetteD|Talk 12:07, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers MarnetteD, sorry about that  :) at least one of those minutes is testament to my steampowered PC! ——SerialNumber54129 12:09, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

No worries SN. If your PC is a big as this it must take up a whole room in your home :-) MarnetteD|Talk 12:13, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Seeing your mention of White Horse whiskey prompts me to leave you this pic for your enjoyment. JW has a whole line of GoT whiskeys in honor of their last season. Glug Glug. MarnetteD|Talk 12:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@MarnetteD: Brilliant! New slogan: "Stupor is coming" :) ——SerialNumber54129 12:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Superb!! MarnetteD|Talk 15:40, 14 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please discuss your changes on the talk page of Waqar Zaka. There appears to be a question about some of the sources, which is of course a valid discussion to have. I have added 2 more sources and am seeking engagement on the talk page.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 21:49, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I've responded there. Your sourcing is/was poor enough, but the NPOV language—worse. ——SerialNumber54129 21:55, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see any NPOV problems - the language that I used is in multiple reliable sources, and doesn't seem to be either praising or damning anything. It's just very plain factual language. Perhaps on the talk page you could explain what you find POV about it.--Jimbo Wales (talk) 22:40, 19 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It has been explained to you, multiple times. ——SerialNumber54129 09:20, 20 April 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Marc Bloch you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Marc Bloch for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Midnightblueowl -- Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:41, 24 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 27 June 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article A Short English Chronicle, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 15th-century Short English Chronicle described King Edward IV as receiving instantaneous notification of treason from God? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/A Short English Chronicle. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, A Short English Chronicle), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

 — Amakuru (talk) 00:02, 27 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 1 July 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Loveday, 1458, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that the 1458 Loveday, which was intended to unite Henry VI's nobility, only resulted in uniting his enemies? The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Loveday, 1458. You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Loveday, 1458), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

Gatoclass (talk) 00:03, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Discussion

Can you review the sentence in the lede containing the word 'money'. Your original was:

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done by with money already owed the by the government.

Recently this was:

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done by with money already owed by the government.

I've just changed it to

although the Yorkists were bound to pay large sums in compensation, this was done with money already owed by the government.

But that reads very strangely. "owed by the government"? Should that be "owed to the government"?

Shenme (talk) 01:23, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Shenme: apologise for the delay getting back to you. I couldn't find an easy way to phrase that, in quite a few attempts, but the point was (is) that the Yorkists made the payments to the dead Lancastrians' families with money that was owed to them by the government already (unpaid wages were a fact of life for Henry VI's nobility!). If you can tweak and improve it, go ahead  :) ——SerialNumber54129 13:45, 1 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello SN. The last bit of this post calls back to a memorable moment from Yes Minister. Jim Hacker writes "round objects" on a memo from Humphrey Appleby. Later in the episode Bernard Woolley tells Hacker that Appleby asked him "Who is this Round and what does he object to?" :-) My dusty old memory banks have forgotten which episode this happened in but it still is an all time funny - or is that punny - for me. Cheers. MarnetteD|Talk

@MarnetteD: It was "Equal Opportunities"—rather apt considering current goings-on  :)

But yeah, that was exactly what I was alluding to, safe in the knowledge that not one in a 1000 here would have the faintest idea what I was talking about. Except—except—I forgot about your truly encyclopaedic knowledge of british TV. Absolutely effing incredible! ——SerialNumber54129 17:39, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Now you are making me blush! Great job on remembering the episode!! Cheers again. MarnetteD|Talk 18:10, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

On 5 August 2019, Did you know was updated with a fact from the article Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!, which you recently created, substantially expanded, or brought to good article status. The fact was ... that during the Peasants' Revolt in Cambridge, Margery Starre danced with a mob that sacked Corpus Christi College and burnt its charters, shouting: "Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!"? You are welcome to check how many page hits the article got while on the front page (here's how, Away with the learning of clerks, away with it!), and it may be added to the statistics page if the total is over 5,000. Finally, if you know of an interesting fact from another recently created article, then please feel free to suggest it on the Did you know talk page.

— Maile (talk) 00:02, 5 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:William Bonville, 1st Baron Bonville for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Gog the Mild -- Gog the Mild (talk) 14:02, 22 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Would you please help me understand what you meant by, "It's a funny sort of RTV where the editor still talking to people on meta"? Did you mean to imply that was actually happening? If not, what did you mean? EllenCT (talk) 22:03, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi SN, thanks for your comment on the FAR for this. One thing was it a Support—if so can you make it obvious for the co-ordinator please? Norfolkbigfish (talk) 22:18, 29 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A request for comment is now open to provide an opportunity to amend the structure, rules, and procedures of the 2019 English Wikipedia Arbitration Committee election and resolve any issues not covered by existing rules. You are receiving this message because you were listed as a user who would like to be notified when the 2019 RfC begins. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 21:52, 31 August 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The fourth round of the competition has finished in a flurry of last minute activity, with 454 points being required to qualify for the final round. It was a hotly competitive round with two contestants with over 400 points being eliminated, and all but two of the finalists having achieved an FA during the round. Casliber, our 2016 winner, was the highest point-scorer, followed by Enwebb and Lee Vilenski, who are both new to the competition. In fourth place was SounderBruce, a finalist last year. But all those points are swept away as we start afresh for the final round.

Round 4 saw the achievement of 11 featured articles. In addition, Adam Cuerden scored with 18 FPs, Lee Vilenski led the GA score with 8 GAs while Kosack performed 15 GA reviews. There were around 40 DYKs, 40 GARs and 31 GAs overall during round 4. Even though contestants performed more GARs than they achieved GAs, there was still some frustration at the length of time taken to get articles reviewed.

As we start round 5, we say goodbye to the eight competitors who didn't quite make it; thank you for the useful contributions you have made to the Cup and Wikipedia, and we hope you will join us again next year. 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 14 days of "earning" them (some people have fallen foul of this rule and the points have been removed).

If you are concerned that your nomination, whether it be for a good article, 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). 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. 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) 18:44, 1 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

http://www.unkut.com/2005/06/holdin-new-cards-scaramanga-interview/ https://www.linkedin.com/in/sun-large-records-star-of-the-empire-mgmt-a-publ-70986832/detail/recent-activity/shares/ Finally the full true story about the Dr. Octagon concept is out!! Read now!!!

1. "Dr. Octagon/Dr.Octagynocologist)-Bulk Records/Mo'WaxRecords/DreamWorks Records 4 songs 1."No Awareness b/w Bear Witness" 12" 2. "Dr. Octagon" 3. "On Production" 4. "Biology 101"

The Dr. Octagon concept was developed by Sir Menelik for Kool Keith in 1994. The multi-syllabic, on beat/off beat style of rap cadence with futuristic/sci-fi context was the calling card of the Dr. Octagon album. Assistance and inspiration also came from Alexander Calderon of the rap group "Raw Breed" Alex Calderon had a group named "Dr. Bizarro" that disbanded that had a similar plot in pre-conception to Dr. Octagon. Alex and Sir Menelik worked on demo's for songs together at Ice-T's studio in LA at the time. The original concept song that started the whole Dr.Octagon recording process was the "So Intelligent" featuring Kool Keith and DLS (produced by T.R. Love UltraMagnetic Mc's) off the Cyclops 4000 demo TR Love was making at the time for for Sir Menelik in 1994. T.R. Love also worked on demo's at that time for Raw breed and Kool Keith. After some time the duo of Sir Menelik recorded the Dr. Octagon track (produced by K.Matlin). Dan Nakamura had Bulk Records that wanted to put together a project with Kool Keith. Stretch Armstrong and Bobbito on 89.9 got the So intelligent demo from Sir Menelik. That is how the Dr. Octagon project got its legs.Sir Menelik had made the demo's recorded during that time period a two part project -Dr.Octagon demo's were for Kool Keith, and Cyclops 4000 demos were for Sir Menelik. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga (talk • contribs) 11:04, 2 September 2019 (UTC) You claim to opposes the Wikimedia Foundation's arbitrary, opaque, and dictatorial office-banning of administrators when the community and ArbCom are more than capable of handling the issue themselves. And yet, you do commit the same offenses against me and countless other users!! You are a hypocrite!! Stop flagging my user page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga (talk • contribs) 11:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

• @Sir Menelik aka Scaramanga: I have no idea what you are talking about. The page has been deleted. Please do not recreate it. Many thanks. ——SerialNumber54129 12:33, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi

Apologies for bolding your Sup on the FAR for this article. I thought that was your intention and didn't want for it to get missed in the large number of comments. If it was inappropriate at least I have learned something! Norfolkbigfish (talk) 13:34, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

An IP editor has restored the contents of Jim and Mary McCartney. --MrClog (talk) 14:01, 2 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, in this post at WP:AN, you mentioned an old discussion about "deprecated hyphenated parameters". If you could ping me with a link to it, that might help me in a discussion on a different topic. Thanks, Mathglot (talk) 22:37, 3 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to move your recent edit to the Fram PD talk to a new section, but I'd also like to invite you to air any grievances you might have against the clerks or the arbitrators here, on my talk page, or by email to me. I'm curious to hear what you think we should be doing differently. Best, Kevin (aka L235 · t · c) 19:03, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure you should waste your time, SN. This got me nowhere - I was ignored in the end. The clerks seem to be almost as incompetent as the committee at the moment. - Sitush (talk) 21:29, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@SN, can I direct you to my reply to FPAS here? On this one, at least, the arbs and clerks can't be blamed; given the nature of the case if they didn't follow the established procedure there would be people screaming for heads on poles, and much as I may think this "sectioned commentary" business is a Really Bad Idea it's the way things have been done for the past four years. ‑ Iridescent 21:35, 5 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Duke and Duchess of Windsor's tour of Germany, 1937 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 Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 22:21, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

This is to let you know that the Coterel gang article has been scheduled as today's featured article for October 18, 2019. Please check the article needs no amendments. If you're interested in editing the main page text, you're welcome to do so at Wikipedia:Today's featured article/October 18, 2019, but note that a coordinator will trim the lead to around 1000 characters anyway, so you aren't obliged to do so.

For Featured Articles promoted on or after October 1, 2018, there will be an existing blurb linked from the FAC talk page, which is likely to be transferred to the TFA page by a coordinator at some point.

We suggest that you watchlist Wikipedia:Main Page/Errors up to the day of this TFA. Thanks! Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:30, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the article, and sorry that I missed the FAC with the introduduction "Gang of ruffians, hiding out in Sherwood Forest, duffing up royal officials, fair maids and boozy priests, history releases not their secrets. The Coterel Gang: A likely historical antecedent of the Robin Hood legend. AKA more fun and games from the early 14th-c. when the King wanted to go to Scotland but ended up in Derbyshire, and those who wanted to stay in Derbyshire went to Scotland."! - I'll open a peer review for Clara Schumann, today, the day her piano concerto graces the Main page ;) - ... her image graces even more. - I don't know what to respond to PMC who tells me a ban is a ban, the day I celebrate that my favourite editor told a freshly banned (OTD seven years ago) "go on with life, have a laugh". Along with the creed of the banned, it's in my edit notice, and premeditated to survive me. More on my talk, with the face and the smile. Now going to improve Anke Fuchs who died. --Gerda Arendt (talk) 07:15, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hey Serial Number. Since you left a brief comment there, I wonder if I could interest you in a prose review at Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Ursula_K._Le_Guin/archive1. It's nice to have comments from folks who usually write about very different topics; it helps me find things that I missed. No pressure though. Vanamonde (Talk) 22:32, 10 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, I have failed your GA nomination due to it being in need of major reorganization. Please see my comments on the nom page and feel free to resubmit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:%C6%91/8_and_be_there/GA1 Taewangkorea (talk) 00:37, 13 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Taewangkorea: I have no idea why that article particularly attracts the most inexperienced of editors. But thanks for your attempted input. ——SerialNumber54129 16:02, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 legacy of World War II

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid 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 Caker18 -- Caker18 (talk) 20:01, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid you nominated as a good article has been placed on hold . The article is close to meeting the good article criteria, but there are some minor changes or clarifications needing to be addressed. If these are fixed within 7 days, the article will pass; otherwise it may fail. See Talk:North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid for issues which need to be addressed. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caker18 -- Caker18 (talk) 22:41, 17 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:North Korean Embassy in Madrid raid for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caker18 -- Caker18 (talk) 18:42, 18 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
30		Intellivision Lives! (talk)	Add sources
10		York Way (talk)	Add sources
1,619		9/11 Truth movement (talk)	Add sources
51		Day of the Dumpster (talk)	Add sources
3,915		Sam Gyimah (talk)	Add sources
1,102		Guo Wengui (talk)	Add sources
226		Premiership of Theresa May (talk)	Cleanup
140		The Sunset Limited (film) (talk)	Cleanup
6		SpazzStick (talk)	Cleanup
72		Left Socialist-Revolutionaries (talk)	Expand
427		London Borough of Camden (talk)	Expand
38		Friedlieb Ferdinand Runge (talk)	Expand
20		TV Powww (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
64		Kate Dover (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
28		Herbert Rowse Armstrong (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
95		Pretoria Central Prison (talk)	Merge
19		Heterotetramer (talk)	Merge
19,992		Manson Family (talk)	Merge
2		Harvey Teasdale (talk)	Wikify
5		Aubrey Mokoape (talk)	Wikify
37		Fuhu (talk)	Wikify
17		Sergei Bobokhov (talk)	Orphan
2		St Albans Cathedral (Pretoria) (talk)	Orphan
58		Shooting bias (talk)	Orphan
9		Second Sight: A Love Story (talk)	Stub
223		Luke Graham (politician) (talk)	Stub
106		Royal prerogative of mercy (talk)	Stub
164		Oliver Dowden (talk)	Stub
6		Caroline Barron (talk)	Stub
7		Koran Sindo (talk)	Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 12:26, 19 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hello Serial Number 54129, This is an automated notification to remind you about unanswered peer review requests at WP:PR (Don't want these notifications? Click to unsubscribe or change your subscription).

You can see a list of all categories at WP:PRWAITING. We hope to see you soon Wikipedia:Peer Review. Happy Reviewing! KadaneBot (talk) 04:04, 23 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

The article Duke and Duchess of Windsor's tour of Germany, 1937 you nominated as a good article has passed ; see Talk:Duke and Duchess of Windsor's tour of Germany, 1937 for comments about the article. Well done! If the article has not already been on the main page as an "In the news" or "Did you know" item, you can nominate it to appear in Did you know. Message delivered by Legobot, on behalf of Caeciliusinhorto -- Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 19:21, 25 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I don't know, #54129, but closing something in pink is probably against some guideline somewhere. This may count against you if you run for administrator! Take it easy, Drmies (talk) 20:09, 27 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I was thinking of cracking a joke about AfD and AfD, but I concluded the latter is no laughing matter, particularly when the nearest German province to Auschwitz voted them in at the last election. Ritchie333 ^{(talk) (cont)} 15:39, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...the wife, the cook, and her lover kill a canteloupe? You can't make this up. Drmies (talk) 15:18, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

For a work in progress, you might've just hit on the DYK! ——SerialNumber54129 15:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for reverting that. I have no clue what happened there. spryde | talk 12:39, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Sp: No problem at all, clearly accidental, not worth maing a song and dance over. In the spirit of "it could've happened to anyone", I nearly blanked the entire lead of TFA earlier and only just caught myself! :o thanks for the message though! ——SerialNumber54129 12:53, 7 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

		The Oddball Barnstar
		By the authority vested in me by myself it gives me great pleasure to present you with this barnstar in recognition of numerous very fine articles true to the tradition of, um, well, the one which you seem to have started yourself. Long may it prosper. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:21, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: pray tell! Surely Mowbrays, Bonvilles etc not so oddball 😊 hope all's well! ——SerialNumber54129 11:53, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

But it is the others that stick in the mind. Good thanks. Trying, and failing, to get back into some content creation. (People keep distracting me by sending me reading matter, the bounders.) You? Gog the Mild (talk) 11:58, 11 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Heh  :) ​ I was thinking, how about a co-nom on Battle of Pontvallain? It might ned a little tidying first, as I haven't looked at it for sometime, but it should be doable, and it's rather up your street isn't it? Or perhaps a little late than you prefer? Although I see that as I do, you enjoy a movable feast. The bonus, of course, is that we share results for half the work. What say ye? ——SerialNumber54129 15:13, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A co-nom sounds good to me. It also has the attraction of allowing each of us to run a separate independent FAC at the same time. My last FAC was from 1355, so I am breaking out of the 1345-46 ghetto. Actually my next two FACs were going to be from 256 BC and 1945, just for a change. How would you like to approach it? I could give it "the works", then you could comment on all the things that you don't like about the result; or I am happy to use any other approach you prefer. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:55, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

GtM, I've never done it before. Well, a co-nom anyway :) how about you give it your treatment? I'm aware that perhaps even the layout, structure might be adjustable: let's have a look with what you come up with?

The Battle of Cape Ecnomus is a nice article. Well out of my comfort zone, fair play to you! ——SerialNumber54129 18:30, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Re co-nom: me neither, which means that I have no preconceptions/haven't a clue what I am doing. I will try to start tomorrow. Note that I usually take several runs at an article. So me going right through an article making changes is not necessarily an indication that I think I am finished.

Ecnomus - that was part of the idea. It was interestingly stretching to try and get it into a comprehensible article. Much the same applies to my getting sucked into the late-Medieval stuff. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:01, 12 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 and Nick-D look at three works Op-ed: Hawkeye7 on writing a military biography

Greetings, Serial Number 54129. In the Request to re-open the July 2019 RfC, you commented, "remind The Gnome of their obligations to respond to queries regarding a close they have made." (See diff.) It would be unproductive to conduct a conversation in two talk pages, so let me point out that there is one in my own talk page (here). You might perhaps want to follow it or participate in it. Take care. -The Gnome (talk) 19:58, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A point that would be more persuasive, The Gnome, if you hadn't had to have my original comment pointed out to you, a discussion at which you failed to respond, which rather proves my point. Happy days. Communication is essential, be mindful. ——SerialNumber54129 20:26, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

There is simply no formal obligation by the closing editor to respond when being asked to reopen a closed RfC. So, I fail to see what "point" exactly has been proven here. I merely informed you, as a matter of courtesy, that there is a discussion going on elsewhere in which you might be interested. -The Gnome (talk) 21:12, 15 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

...ah, you simply do not understand your informal obligations to the project and your colleagues. Thanks for establishing that. ——SerialNumber54129 04:57, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Serial Number 54129, I'm sorry that you felt my comments on Ritchie's talk page were unhelpful. I feel it important to voice my own comments and opinions regarding Ritchie333's actions. I would ask that, in future, you ask me first before removing my talk page comments per the guidelines in WP:TPO. I hope that this does not cause conflict between us, as I do respect you as an editor. Thank you for your time and best wishes to you. Waggie (talk) 05:39, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

this also removed someone else's post (Ritchie's) - not sure that's what you intended. — Ched (talk) 07:02, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks Ched, have restored the post to its place. ——SerialNumber54129 07:08, 16 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Note: All columns in this table are sortable, allowing you to rearrange the table so the articles most interesting to you are shown at the top. All images have mouse-over popups with more information. For more information about the columns and categories, please consult the documentation and please get in touch on SuggestBot's talk page with any questions you might have.

Views/Day	Quality	Title	Tagged with…
146		Ralph Neville, 1st Earl of Westmorland (talk)	Add sources
918		Anthony Fantano (talk)	Add sources
34		Katherine Neville, Baroness Hastings (talk)	Add sources
75		Serverless Framework (talk)	Add sources
14		Baron Bergavenny (talk)	Add sources
20		George Neville, 1st Baron Latimer (talk)	Add sources
47		Homebuilt computer (talk)	Cleanup
4,838		Me Too movement (talk)	Cleanup
10		Philippe Rahmy (talk)	Cleanup
1,615		Liberty University (talk)	Expand
12		Timeline of Internet conflicts (talk)	Expand
71		To Hull and Back (talk)	Expand
20		Mouse Systems (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
16		Tandon Corporation (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
39		Poqet PC (talk)	Unencyclopaedic
458		Johnson ministry (talk)	Merge
725		Numerical analysis (talk)	Merge
148		Power behind the throne (talk)	Merge
527		Lady Miss Kier (talk)	Wikify
20		History of the English fiscal system (talk)	Wikify
55		Timeline of virtualization development (talk)	Wikify
11		Joseph Cantalupo (talk)	Orphan
12		Abionic (talk)	Orphan
3		Adrián El Charani (talk)	Orphan
3		Penn State Erie (Behrend), Pennsylvania (talk)	Stub
7		Anne Hastings, Countess of Pembroke (talk)	Stub
3		Jatibarang, Indramayu (talk)	Stub
8		Caput baroniae (talk)	Stub
55		Magnum Concilium (talk)	Stub
10		John Scrope, 4th Baron Scrope of Masham (talk)	Stub

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. We appreciate that you have signed up to receive suggestions regularly; your contributions make Wikipedia better — thanks for helping!

If you have feedback on how to make SuggestBot better, please let us know on SuggestBot's talk page. -- SuggestBot (talk) 00:37, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there, I'm pleased to inform you that I've begun reviewing the article Order of Brothelyngham 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 Amitchell125 -- Amitchell125 (talk) 05:21, 18 October 2019 (UTC)[reply]