User talk:Jackyd101

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If you have come here to request that I review an article for GA, then please enter the request at the bottom of this page and also list the article at User:Jackyd101/GA article reviews in the appropriate section, I will then drop you a line telling you when I will probably be able to conduct the review. Thankyou.--Jackyd101 (talk) 18:50, 21 March 2008 (UTC)

Archives

Archive 1 (Apr. 2006 – Apr. 2007) Archive 2 (Apr. 2007 – Dec. 2007) Archive 3 (Dec. 2007 – May 2008)

[edit] Map

Sure, go ahead and email it to me and also email me any online refs you have (if there is something I could look at). My email is enabled - probably have to email me first, then I'll email you back, etc. I'll email you now so you have my address Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:58, 22 May 2008 (UTC) PS I will wait for your email ;-) Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:59, 22 May 2008 (UTC)

• Would you mind looking at Worlds End State Park - it is in peer review now? Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:40, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
  • Thanks so much for your review - I have some more pictures to upload and plan to take more before FAC. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:57, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Wikicookie

I am awarding you this WikiCookie for your constructive edits on Wikipedia--LAAFan 16:15, 23 May 2008 (UTC)

[edit] The Military history WikiProject Newsletter : Issue XXVII (May 2008)

The May 2008 issue of the Military history WikiProject newsletter has been published. You may read the newsletter, change the format in which future issues will be delivered to you, or unsubscribe from this notification by following the link. Thank you.
This has been an automated delivery by BrownBot (talk) 00:55, 3 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Oswald

Knowing it was 1838 may help track down the GCMG, so I'll try to have another look tomorrow. Battalion certainly sounds more likely for the Rifles than battery. Come to think of it, I didn't actually search on colonel commandant, so that might turn something up. David Underdown (talk) 21:30, 4 June 2008 (UTC)

Still nothing I'm afraid. Other appointments as Colonel Commandant of rifles defintiely refer to "of a Battalion" though. David Underdown (talk) 08:12, 5 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Re request

Hi Jacky, and yes, I had noticed you were back per your sterling work on the GA sweep (you've overtaken my count anyway!). No probs re your request, I'll take a look at them & see what I can do. Just to double-check, if possible you'd like the page histories for the userspace versions of the article to be merged into the page histories for the mainspace ones...? EyeSerene^talk 07:26, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

That's a good idea, and something I'll probably steal! I haven't been active there for a while now (tied up with copyedits) but hopefully I'll be heading back that way soon... EyeSerene^talk 07:38, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

I do use templates from my sandbox for reviews, but trying to improve my sweep efficiency is one of those things I keep meaning to think about and never actually get round to doing. Vetting the entire section before beginning detailed reviews is definitely an idea I'll be adopting though, and it makes so much sense I can't understand why it never occurred to me! I'm in your debt ;) EyeSerene^talk 08:39, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] William Speirs Bruce: inline citations

Thank you for your comments on the talk page. I have formatted the inline citations in accordance with {{cite web}}. However, I would point out that this information, in {{cite web]] format, was and is available in the Sources section, as has been my previous practice. Brianboulton (talk) 15:56, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

[edit] History merge

OK, I've done that for Battle of Lissa (1811) (after reading up on the procedure!). If you don't mind checking the article to make sure I haven't bodged it up, I'll do the other two. I also deleted your userspace version, which was automatically turned into a redirect by the move - if you want this restoring, let me know. EyeSerene^talk 21:00, 9 June 2008 (UTC)

That's a relief! It looked ok, and I'm glad not to have to put everything back (which looks even more fiddly than merging). They aren't ideal for a history merge as a few edits overlap between the versions, but not so much as to make things incomprehensible. I'll sort the others out tomorrow, now that I know what I'm doing. And yes, the tools have come in pretty useful (there's more of a point to WP:RCP when you can actually do something about some of the nuggets out there!) EyeSerene^talk 21:24, 9 June 2008 (UTC)